La Der des Ders – The War to End War from Hexasim is a 1-2 player slightly abstracted strategic level look at World War I. The game allows the players to relive the First World War at a strategic level, with each player controlling one of the 2 sides either the Entente, consisting of France, England, Russia, Serbia and other minor nations or the Central Powers including Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and a few minors. La Der des Ders can also be played solo, with a dedicated solitaire bot called “Athena” who utilizes special Cornflower Cards to make decisions about what technologies to invest in, where to undertake offensives and how to utilize limited resources and reinforcements. Each turn, players gain an amount of Resource Points dependent on what nations are in the war, which they can allocate to different areas to guide their overall strategy. Victory is achieved by launching offensives that drain the morale of enemy nations, forcing them out of the conflict through collapse.
In Action Point 1, we looked at the Game Board, discussing the Collapse Tracks, Trade Tracks, Russian Revolution Track and Naval Control Table and other various on-board tables and offensive spaces. In Action Point 2, we covered the Technology Phase and the Technology Tree and Technological Improvement Boards. In Action Point 3, we examined the Event Cards and how they inject the historical narrative into the gameplay and also alter the conditions of the game. In Action Point 4, we walked through an example of an Offensive and took a look at the combat procedure. In Action Point 5, we reviewed the Victory Conditions. In this Action Point, which is the final entry in the series, we will give an overview of the “Athena” solitaire bot and how it works.
Athena
La Der des Ders – The War to End War is designed as a 2-player game but it does have a dedicated solitaire bot called Athena that can be used to simulate an opponent to play against. This Athena bot, named after the Greek goddess of strategy, can be used to play as either the Entente or as the Central Powers and is focused on the use of special cards referred to as Cornflower Cards. There are 12 of these Cornflower Cards and these are used to determine the various actions taken by the Athena bot during their turn. A solitaire play uses the usual rules for the 2-player game, with just a few exceptions.
The Cornflower Cards are multi-use cards that are divided into 3 different sections to be used at different points of the Sequence of Play in a solitaire game. They are drawn and referred to during the Technology Development Phase, the Reinforcement Phase and the Offensive Phase. Let’s take a look at the anatomy of these cards. In the above picture, you will notice that there are 3 main categories listed at the top of the card including Technologies at the top, Reinforcements in the middle and Offensives on the bottom of the card. During the appropriate phase, the player will draw 1 Cornflower Card for the Athena AI.
If it is the Technology Development Phase, the player will refer to the top of the card where there are listed the 6 different technologies that can be pursued. Under each of these categories will show the number of Resource Points that will be spent by Athena in order to attempt to unlock a new level in each of the technologies. If there is an X in that space, that means that Athena will not attempt to gain a level of that technology during this phase. If there is a 2 listed, this means that 2 RP will be spent and the roll for the technology will gain a +1 DRM. Keep in mind though, that if the technology shown is not available yet because the year it is available has not yet arrived, then the bot will not spend a resource to attempt that technology. If Athena doesn’t have enough Resource Points to make all the attempts shown on the card, she will spend as much as possible to attempt these technologies. Athena never re-rolls the die for these attempts by discarding a Technological Research Cube for previous failed attempts. One of the differences for Athena during this step is that if a success is earned in unlocking a level of technology, she will get to advance all cylinders of the corresponding technology in all sectors under Athena’s control. This means all of the countries of the alliance as well as the active minors. These technological improvements cost no Resource Points.
If it is the Reinforcement Phase, Athena will attempt to reinforce sectors that have suffered losses in previous turns according to the following priority order:
The sector which suffered the most losses or in other words the sector whose cube is furthest from its maximum;
The sector with the second most losses and then the sectors in the following order, ignoring the sectors already covered above:
When you have chosen what sector is to receive reinforcements based upon the priority described, the player will draw as many Cornflower Cards as there are spaces separating the Sector Cube from the space with the red value. After drawing the cards, the player will count the instances of cards that have the name of that sector shown on them. If you look at the 3 cards shown above, if doing reinforcements for Germany they would move their Sector Cube up only 1 space on the Collapse Track as once Germany is listed in the middle of the card under Reinforcements. Very simple. Athena will also have to spend the required Resource Points from their total to actually move the Sector Cube up and if they cannot afford all of the reinforcements shown by the cards, they will move and pay for what they can afford. This phase ends when Athena no longer has enough Resource Points, or when all the sectors have been able to try to obtain reinforcements.
Finally, if it is the Offensive Phase, each side launches an offensive in turn starting with the side that has the initiative. When it is Athena’s turn to attack, the player will draw one Cornflower Card and refer to the bottom portion of the card, which will indicate the sector Athena is attacking. The sector to be attacked will be the one on the left of the card if Athena is playing the Entente, and the one on the right if she is playing as the Central Powers. The sector indicated on the card must always be attacked by the sector that has the best chance of inflicting damage. This usually means the sector with the highest current Operational Value and that has not yet launched an Offensive this turn. In the event of a tie, preference should be given to the sector least likely to be able to attack elsewhere during a later card draw in the turn. The size of the Offensive will be equal to the current Operational Value of the attacking sector only if the number of Resource Points Athena has remaining will allow for it. Otherwise the Offensive is reduced to the number of remaining RP. Once Athena’s Resource Points have been spent, the dice rolled and any losses applied, the player will then take their own turn to launch an Offensive or decide to pass. Then Athena will draw a new Cornflower Card to determine their next Offensive. If there are ever 3 Cornflower Cards drawn by Athena without having the ability to attack because of sector availability or Offensives by adjacent sectors have already been taken, the Offensive Phase will come to an end.
That is all there is to the Cornflower Cards and the Athena bot. It is a really well designed system that removes most of the work by the player when playing solitaire. There will be times when you have to make a decision, as described above with Offensives, but these decisions are easy and the hard work is done by the simple flipping of a card.
I do want to point out one final thing. The sequence of play differs slightly from the 2-player game as it rearranges when the Athena bot does a few of the steps during the Spend Resource Points Phase as shown below. The human player will start by doing their Reinforcements first followed by their Technology investment. Athena will then go and do their Technology investment first followed by Reinforcements. Both players will then move into the Offensive Phase and the player with initiative as shown on the turn track will take the first Offensive of the turn.
The Athena bot works very well as a playable solitaire experience for La Der Des Ders. The Cornflower Cards are a stroke of genius and really are easy to use, which makes playing the game a much better experience. I found that the bot actually holds its own in the game, even though they are not in total control of their own actions like a human player would be. The changes also made in the Sequence of Play as well as to the way Technology Investments work more than make up for the lack of true intelligence by the system and will definitely give the player a run for their money. I have played the game about 5 times solitaire, both as the Entente and as the Central Powers, and have won just 2 out of 5 tries. But the experience was easy, enjoyable and pretty seamless. The game really is a great example of a slightly abstracted strategic level look at World War I and I would wholeheartedly recommend this game to anyone who has an interest in The Great War.
I shot a playthrough video for the solitaire system and you can watch that at the following link (beware as I did make a few errors but I have found errors make viewers understand the rules of the game better):
I also did a video review and you can watch that at the following link:
Thank you for allowing me to share this game with you through this series of posts over the past several months. I have very much enjoyed doing these and I hope that you find them helpful.
With this My Favorite Wargame Cards Series, I hope to take a look at a specific card from the various wargames that I have played and share how it is used in the game. I am not a strategist and frankly I am not that good at games but I do understand how things should work and be used in games. With that being said, here is the next entry in this series.
#72: Commodus from The Wars of Marcus Aurelius: Rome 170-180CE from Hollandspiele
TheWars of Marcus Aurelius: Rome 170-180CE is a solitaire only game that uses cards similarly to a CDG to simulate the strategic level struggle of the Romans led by Marcus Aurelius to stave off the invasions of Germanic tribes and Sarmatian raiders as they encroach on Roman territory across the Danube River. That’s the history. And it is really well integrated. The game play is very fun, strategic, with lots of decision points about what to do and what cards to use, and it is really challenging.
In the game, the Roman player has a deck of Roman Cards that can be used for the printed events for various effects or that can be discarded to take any number of actions such as attack a Barbarian army or Off-Map Conflict enemy, advance the marker on the Imperium Track, add two Level 1 Forts to any eligible map spaces, flip one Level 1 Fort to a Level 2 Fort among several other actions. Sometimes the printed events in the game are just more powerful than discarding a card for just 1 action so you have to pay attention to this economy and make sure you get the most out of your cards. Now, keep in mind, sometimes discarding a good card whose ability is not right for the current situation you find yourself in is part of the game but you have to use these cards wisely to do well in the game.
The game uses two separate decks of cards including the Barbarian Deck (Green) and The Roman Deck (Red). Both of the decks are made up of 50 cards each but each have very different purposes. The Barbarian Deck is used to determine the actions of the invading Germanic tribes as well as events that effect the war effort including mutinies, plague and the will of the people. While the Roman Deck provides the resources and events that are used by the Roman player to mount a defense against the invasions and to fight back each of the different barbarian tribes. There are unique cards called Late War Cards in the deck that will be held out until the start of the 175CE turn at which time they will be mixed in with the cards to form a new Late War Deck. There are also special cards that are marked with an asterisk that if played for the event will be discarded from the game to form what is called a History Pile.
In this entry, we will focus on the Roman Card Commodus, which provides some opportunity to shore up your failing Imperium Points or even cancel an ongoing Mutiny of your troops on the board. In my first 5 or 6 plays of the game, the most common way that I lost was by allowing the Imperium Point Track to reach zero, which results in Marcus Aurelius being usurped and the player immediately losing the game. I was confounded and very frustrated about why I couldn’t prevent this from happening! I could see the end coming but struggled with keeping that Track above water. There are a few cards included in the Roman Deck that provide increases to the Imperium Track and I highly recommend you take these type of events when they come into your hand rather than discarding these cards to take another action, that might seem important at the time, but in the end these events are just too efficient to pass on. Commodus will provide you an option. This option is taking the +2 IP or another type of action such as ending a Mutiny (very important as it usually takes you discarding a card and losing an IP) or drawing two cards to add to your hand (imagine if you can only draw that Local Guides card you have been looking for or the Ambush that you need to take on the Quadi in their Home space). It becomes a choice of “either/or” and I am here to tell you the only reason the “or option” is provided is to lure you away from the real prize in that of gaining the +2 IP. Please listen to my advice and take the +2 IP. You will thank me in the end! Remember, that the concept of Imperium Points (IP) represent the Emperor’s overall political authority and stability in Rome. If the IP track ever reaches zero, the player immediately loses due to usurpation. Points are lost from specific card events, barbarian surges, and certain combat results, requiring players to prioritize special events to gain them back
Commodus was Roman emperor from 177 to 192AD, first serving as nominal co-emperor under his father Marcus Aurelius and then ruling alone from 180AD. Commodus’s sole reign is commonly thought to mark the end of the Pax Romana, a golden age of peace and prosperity in the history of the Roman Empire.
Commodus accompanied his father during the Marcomannic Wars in 172AD and on a tour of the Eastern provinces in 176AD. The following year, he became the youngest emperor and consul up to that point, at the age of 16. His solo reign saw less military conflict than that of Marcus Aurelius, but internal intrigues and conspiracies abounded, goading Commodus to an increasingly dictatorial style of leadership. This culminated in his creating a deific personality cult, including his performances as a gladiator in the Colosseum. Throughout his reign, Commodus entrusted the management of daily routine affairs to his palace chamberlain and praetorian prefects, namely Saoterus, Perennis, and Cleander. Roman soldiers and the general populace generally liked Commodus during his reign, largely because he was popular with the masses and focused on lavish spending rather than costly foreign wars. He was adored for presenting himself as a masculine, gladiatorial Hercules, though the Senate despised him
Commodus was assassinated by the wrestler Narcissus in 192AD, ending the Nerva–Antonine dynasty. He was succeeded by Pertinax, the first claimant in the tumultuous Year of the Five Emperors.
I shot a playthrough video for the game and you can watch that at the following link:
I also followed that up with a full video review sharing my thoughts:
A few years ago, I came across a new designer named Wolfgang Klein (no relation to Alexander Klein) and his new company Assault Games. They create fantastic tactical level wargames and we have played several fo them and also got a chance to meet both Wolfgang and his friend and partner Erich Rankl. They are currently working on a new edition of their first game called Assault – Red Horizon ’41: Revised Edition and they readying it for a Gamefound campaign yet this spring. I reached out to Wolfgang to get some information about the revisions and changes to the game and he was more than willing to provide a lot of great information.
Wolfgang: Over the past 5 years, Red Horizon ’41 has evolved significantly through continuous development, community feedback, and extensive gameplay experience. What began with Rulebook 1.0 has gradually been refined into a much more mature and developed system. The new revised edition incorporates years of player feedback, integrates content from various expansions, and improves clarity, balance, and presentation across the entire game.
Over the past 5 years, RH41 has developed considerably, both in terms of the Assault System rules and its graphical presentation. In particular, with Sicily ’43 – Gela Beachhead (Rulebook version 2.0) and its expansion Primosole Bridge, we feel that we gained valuable experience that directly influenced the design of this revised edition and that will assist us in future volumes as well to improve the player experience and simulation value of the game.
Most of all, however, we are grateful for the intensive exchange we have had with our Assault fans over many years. We have remained very active in our forums on BoardGameGeek, and it is there that we have gathered, discussed, and evaluated a huge amount of positive and constructive feedback. With all the great ideas and contributions from our players, we have continued refining the rules step by step.
As far as version 2.5 is concerned, the door for feedback will remain open until the end of the upcoming Gamefound campaign.
In concrete terms, rules have been refined, adjusted, expanded, or removed. All texts have been revised to make them easier and more efficient to read. We have also made a clear step forward in wording and terminology. However, we have not changed the core gameplay mechanics. So players familiar with version 1.0 should still find it easy to get back into the system.
Wolfgang: The upcoming version is referred to as a Revised Edition of Assault: Red Horizon ’41. It is not simply a reprint, but a comprehensive refinement of the system.
Major changes to the game and the Assault System include the following:
A box inlay designed for the safe storage of all game components
Overall, the revised edition reflects everything we have learned about the system from our players and through continual play on our end since the original release. I do believe that the system will continue to evolve as other rule clarifications or needed changes come to light.
Wolfgang: After the original edition sold out, interest in the game continued to grow. At the same time, years of development, playtesting, and community feedback had accumulated.
In addition, RH41 is something like the core game for the Eastern Front within the Assault System. Our plan is to design an entire series of modules focused on the Eastern Front, and Red Horizon ’41 is the natural foundation for that planned series.
This created the perfect opportunity to bring the game back in a fully refined and improved edition rather than simply reprinting the original version.
Wolfgang: I would describe it as a very special journey. We have now been working in cooperation with Sound of Drums for 3 years.
What makes this collaboration different from the traditional designer–publisher model is that we at Assault Games work with Sound of Drums on equal footing while maintaining our own independence.
The goal of this cooperation was to free ourselves from the typical publishing tasks such as production, logistics, and distribution, so that we could focus more fully on developing the Assault System and expanding into future opportunites. In many respects, this has worked very well. In other areas, there are still things that can be improved.
Sound of Drums, and Uwe Walentin in particular, has worked very hard to keep our backs free for designing by carrying the responsibility for taking care of the worldwide distribution network, logistics, and shipping. From my point of view, that works very well. Uwe is also a highly knowledgeable and perceptive figure when it comes to wargame design, and he has become an important advisor for us. His experience in the games industry helps us do things the right way — and focus on the right things.
One area of the cooperation where we have made major progress is in the structuring and preparation of our print files. I would especially like to thank Marc von Martial (Art Director at Sound of Drums) on this point. Thanks to his templates, we are now able to turn our designs into print-ready files in a much shorter time. That has been a tremendous help for Sicily 43, Primosole Bridge, and now also RH41 Revised Edition.
In the end, I would say that our journey is not over yet. Sound of Drums, like us, is still a young company, so there are new challenges every day. But as the saying goes: “Everything will be fine at the end of the road. If it is not fine yet, then the road is not over.”
Wolfgang: We started the Assault System a long time ago as a new tactical game system, and from the very beginning it was clear that both the rules and the content would continue to evolve over time. Other systems refer to their rulebooks as “Living Rules,” and that is very much how we see the Assault System rules and the game as a whole.
At the same time, it is important to us that we do not do this alone. We want to actively involve our player base in the further development of the system so that it can become the best game system possible. Standing still is simply not an option for us.
Many of the changes were driven by years of gameplay feedback from the community and by our own experience with the system. Over time, we identified:
areas where rules could be streamlined
components that could be improved or added
visual elements that could be made clearer
The goal was always to improve clarity, usability, and gameplay flow without changing the core identity of the system.
Wolfgang: The most visible aspect of the game’s development is undoubtedly the graphical redesign and the addition of new visual features. Michael Grillenberger, supported by Marc from Martial, once again did outstanding work, just as they did on Sicily ’43 and Primosole Bridge. I would like to thank them both once again for that work.
The map artwork in particular will immediately catch the eye. We have raised it to the same high standard seen in Sicily ’43 and Primosole Bridge, which creates an even greater sense of immersion.
Overall, the graphic design has been significantly refined compared to the first edition. Maps, symbols, counters, and other visual elements have been redesigned to improve readability and consistency. Vehicle artwork has also been updated, and the game’s entire visual language has been unified to create a stronger overall identity.
Wolfgang: The visual style supports the core philosophy of the system: clarity, immersion, and functionality.
The artwork strikes a balance between historical authenticity and tabletop readability, which is essential in a tactical wargame where players need to process information quickly. In that sense, the artwork helps reduce the players’ workload so they can focus fully on the game and on the tactical situation on the battlefield.
Wolfgang: One major improvement is the integration of visual symbols directly onto the maps. Last year, we conducted a survey among our players because it was important for us to understand what they thought about the idea of including symbols on the map boards. The result was extremely close.
Many players were concerned that such symbols might reduce immersion. Because we take those concerns seriously, we decided on a more subtle compromise. Elevation levels and some terrain rules are now represented with discreet graphical indicators, allowing players to understand the battlefield layout more quickly without constantly consulting the rulebook.
That, in turn, makes things much easier for the players.
Wolfgang: Quite simply, these changes make the Assault System much more accessible and easier to play. The need to search for information is reduced, and the overall handling of the game becomes smoother.
In particular, readability, gameplay flow, and ease of learning have all improved. Players can now interpret terrain and elevation at a glance, which speeds up play and reduces rule lookups.
Wolfgang: The vehicle illustrations have been updated and refined, providing clearer identification and a more consistent visual style across all units. I think Michael also worked on them simply because he really enjoyed doing so.
These changes enhance both the historical feel and the table presence of the game.
Wolfgang: The revised edition introduces several new terrain types:
Wheat and crop fields
Steep slopes
Covered trails
These elements are closely tied to the historical landscape of the Eastern Front, particularly the region around Białystok in the summer of 1941. Large expanses of wheat and crop fields dominated the countryside and often influenced visibility and movement for advancing troops. During the opening phase of Operation Barbarossa, German and Soviet forces frequently fought across agricultural land where tall grain could provide concealment but also limit observation.
Steep slopes and covered trails reflect the natural terrain features of the area, which included rolling ground, wooded ridges, and narrow rural tracks. Such features often shaped the movement of infantry and vehicles, creating opportunities for ambushes or concealed manoeuvres.
Including these terrain types allows the game to better represent the tactical realities soldiers faced during the early battles around Białystok, while also expanding the range of strategic options available to players.
Wolfgang: The system now includes additional fortifications and obstacle elements, allowing players to represent defensive battlefield preparations more realistically. These counters reflect the kinds of improvised and field-built defenses commonly used by Soviet forces in the border regions during the first days of Operation Barbarossa.
In June 1941, Soviet units attempted to delay the rapid German advance by establishing temporary defensive lines, often using field entrenchments, tank barricades, and hastily constructed obstacles. Barricaded roads and reinforced firing positions were typical features in defensive positions around key crossroads and villages. Although many of these defences were incomplete because of the speed of the German attack, they nevertheless influenced the course of local engagements.
By incorporating such fortifications and obstacles, the game is able to reflect the defensive measures historically present on the battlefield. These new counters expand the tactical possibilities in scenarios and campaigns, while also helping to recreate the atmosphere of the chaotic and desperate fighting that characterised the opening days of the campaign around Białystok.
Wolfgang: The revised edition features an improved box design, including:
A box inlay designed for sleeved cards
A transparent lid for better organisation and visibility of components
These changes were made to improve both storage and usability for players. Many players prefer to sleeve their cards to protect them during repeated play, particularly in games with frequent handling such as card-driven tactical systems. The redesigned inlay ensures that sleeved cards fit comfortably inside the box without bending or compressing them, allowing players to keep their components protected while still maintaining a compact storage solution.
The transparent lid also helps players organise and identify the different components more easily. Counters, cards, and markers can be seen at a glance, which speeds up setup and makes it easier to keep the game organised during play. For a system that may include multiple scenarios and campaign elements, quick access to components is especially useful.
Overall, the improved box design reflects feedback from players of the original edition. By making the storage solution more practical and user-friendly, the new edition aims to make preparation, transport, and long-term storage of the game more convenient.
Wolfgang: The rules have evolved from Rulebook 1.0 to version 2.5, and possibly eventually to 3.0.
Key changes include:
Integrated expansion content
Clarified rules
Streamlined mechanics
Improved structure and organisation
Since the release of the original rulebook, the system has gradually developed through playtesting, player feedback, and the addition of expansion material. Earlier supplements introduced new mechanics and scenario elements that are now fully integrated into the core rules, allowing players to access the complete system without needing to consult multiple documents.
Another important goal of the revision was to clarify rules that had previously caused questions during play. Certain mechanics have been rewritten with clearer wording and additional examples, making it easier for players to understand how the system works in practice. This also reduces ambiguity during gameplay and allows players to focus more on tactical decision-making rather than rule interpretation.
The revised rulebook also streamlines several mechanics. While the core gameplay remains unchanged, some procedures have been simplified to maintain the fast-paced flow of the system. The intention was not to make the game less detailed, but rather to ensure that its mechanics remain intuitive and efficient during play.
Finally, the overall structure of the rulebook has been improved. Sections are now organized more logically, making it easier to locate specific rules during a game. Together, these changes reflect the natural evolution of the system and aim to provide both new and experienced players with a clearer and more accessible ruleset.
Over the years, extensive playtesting and feedback from players helped identify areas where the original rules could be improved. Ambiguities in certain mechanics were clarified, and procedures that occasionally slowed down gameplay were simplified. As a result, the revised rulebook presents the system in a more accessible and consistent way, allowing new players to learn the game more quickly while still preserving the depth that experienced players expect.
The streamlined mechanics also improve the overall flow of play. Turns progress more smoothly, and players can focus more on tactical decisions rather than consulting the rulebook. This is particularly important in a fast-moving tactical system set during the opening stages of Operation Barbarossa, where battlefield situations changed rapidly and decisions had to be made under pressure.
In addition, the revisions helped refine the balance of the system. Through years of scenario testing and community feedback, certain interactions between units, terrain, and combat mechanics were adjusted to ensure that engagements feel both challenging and historically plausible. Together, these improvements create a more polished and engaging gameplay experience while remaining faithful to the original design of the system.
As mentioned before, feedback on Rulebook version 2.5 will remain open until the end of that campaign.
Our goal is to use this period to gather final community input, complete the last refinements, and move the project into production in the best possible shape. A more precise release timeline will be shared as soon as the campaign and production planning are finalised.
Wolfgang: Well, I think Assault Games might become a never-ending story. We will keep working on it as long as we continue to enjoy it—and that could still take a very long time.
Joking aside, we are very active when it comes to new ideas. I actually talked about some of this in our most recent SITREP (a bit of self-promotion here):
We have started publishing a development roadmap so that everyone can see what we are currently working on and what might be coming in the future. Of course, the roadmap only shows the official topics we want to share publicly—and yes, there are also a few unofficial ideas we are exploring behind the scenes.
To give you a small glimpse of what might be ahead, you can already see a draft cover for our upcoming Normandy journey. And that’s not all—there are several other things in development.
Thank you so much for your time in answering our questions Wolfgang and I look forward to future games from Assault Games and Sound of Drums.
In Aces & Armor from PKB Games players take the role of a general (United States, Russia or Germany) in this complex (but easy to learn) strategy game. In addition to attack strength and armor of your troops, their tactical setup, combat experience, damage and terrain have a decisive influence on the outcome of the battle. Since each unit brings its own strengths, you must cleverly assemble your army to win the victory over your opponents. The game can be played either cooperatively or competitively and has a dedicated solitaire mode. The game uses detailed miniatures with many different unit types and has a high re-playability due to the variable start setup. The combat system is involved and a bit complex and depends on type of unit, combat damage, experience, strategic formation, terrain and armor (known from highly rated game Trench Club).
The American Civil War was the bloodiest conflict and a defining event in the history of the United States. The tragedy of the conflict was amplified by the fact the battles were brutally fought with Napoleonic tactics while using new and more lethal weaponry. As a result, over the course of nearly four full years of war, roughly 700,000 Americans were wounded or killed in battle along with another 400,000 soldiers dying from disease.
Blue & Gray Deluxe Edition consists of the original eight games from the SPI Blue & Gray I & II Quadrigames. The battles depicted are among the most important of the American Civil War: Shiloh, Antietam, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville (Hooker & Lee), Gettysburg (Cemetery Hill), Chickamauga, Chattanooga, and The Battle of the Wilderness.
The game mechanics used in this series are based on the well-received Borodino/Napoleon at Waterloo system. Terrain is a significant factor, with everything from rolling farmland to untracked wilderness represented. Battles will often see a back-and-forth struggle for control of critical terrain. Rules for night turns are also provided. A standard set of rules are used, common to all eight games, while each game also has its own set of exclusive rules, historical set-ups, and player and design notes—all from the original SPI games.
Blue & Gray Deluxe Edition features new artwork, double-sided mounted game boards, enlarged counters, player aid cards, numerous optional rules gleaned from other game editions, and new variant counters and markers for use with several variants from Moves and Strategy & Tactics magazines. Reintroduce yourself to these classic games from SPI’s golden era and refight some of the best-known battles of the American Civil War which decided the fate of a nation at war with itself.
Continuing along in this series devoted to the best looking boards found in the wargaming world where I will highlight the art and layout of a different board in a wargame that we have played to show you the various talents of the artists and graphic designers involved. In my humble opinion, a well designed and attractive board can make all the difference in the world to me enjoying a wargame. Don’t get me wrong, the game has to be good, but if it’s also good looking it always is a better experience. A board can draw me in. Can make me feel that I’m there. Can set the stage for the thematic immersion that we all crave. And I have found many of these type of boards and I want to make sure that I share them with you.
In this entry in the series, we will be taking a look at the fantastic looking board for Phantom Fury: Iraq, November 9, 2004 The Second Battle for Fallujah 2nd Edition from Nuts! Publishing. Now you might be looking at the board and thinking that is is just a jumbled mess of various colored squares and blocks but there is some hidden and obscured beauty in these squares but also a lot of great photo realistic depictions of city blocks, streets and dark alleys that were present in the city of Fallujah during this pivotal battle of the Iraq War in 2004. Nicolas Roblin is an emerging artist who has five or six game boards to his credit to date and we have played and really enjoyed then including This War Without an Enemy (2020) from Nuts! Publishing, 300: Earth and Water from Nuts! Publishing (2018), Saladin (2022) from Shakos and Border States (2022) from Shakos. But he also is starting to branch out more and has done the board for the very interesting solitaire wargame called Phantom Fury: Iraq, November 9, 2004 The Second Battle for Fallujah 2nd Edition. I would say that he has a very easy style that is focused on showing key locations in a light that emphasizes their importance to the historical story that the game designer is attempting to tell. What I mean by that will be evident as we take a look at the board for Phantom Fury, but one thing I would point out is the focus on the boundaries of the various districts inside the city. He gives these areas a very interesting treatment as well as a focus on the aesthetic elements of the setting. When you look at the board, you get the feeling that you are inside the city itself with a look at small buildings, walls, streets and even key locations such as the mosque.
Phantom Fury 2nd Edition is a solitaire wargame that simulates at a tactical level the operations carried out by United States Marines (USMC) to secure the town of Fallujah, Iraq in November 2004 and to attempt to suppress all armed resistance by the insurgents. The game focuses specifically on the fighting carried out by the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines on the morning of the 9th of November 2004, in the district of Jolan in the north-west portion of the town. The player will control the USMC forces and the game system manages the actions of the insurgents. The Marines will have to move block by block and house by house clearing out resistance all while trying to minimize casualties and trying not to allow insurgents to infiltrate their lines and reappear in the rear to wreak havoc. This is very much easier said than done though as the first priority is to identify suspected insurgents as the Marines enter new areas that are enemy controlled.
The board for the game measures 22″ x 34″ and represents a part of the Jolan District of the city of Fallujah, divided into 61 Zones of about 50 x 50 meters and into Street Sections of equivalent size. The Zones are marked on the map by dotted lines or continuous lines and are identified by a number in a black or white circle in the Control Box. A target symbol in a Zone indicates that there is a Line of Fire between that Zone and the Zones whose numbers are printed below the symbol. The Target Zones are considered to be Neighboring a particular Zone for the purpose of Fire Combat only.
As you look at the Zones shown below from the upper left hand corner of the board, you will see that various boxes are printed in each of these Zones. These represent buildings and these buildings are multi-storied so they start at the bottom with the red entry areas, that have a nice little door shaped icon in the bottom right hand corner of the box, and then you see stylistic arrows that point up and down at the bottom of each of the above stories. There are also arrows that go to the right and left which mean they enter an adjacent building. At the top of the Zones you will see a black box, that has a neat little roof peak symbol in the upper right hand corner of the box, that represents the roof of the building. These are areas of entry from one building to the next and if used by the Marines or the Insurgents, will grant them a bonus DRM in combat. I remember when I first set eyes on the board, I was a bit discombobulated and confused but once I get into the rules I quickly realized that this graphical depiction of the stories and the means of ingress/egress was a stroke of genius and worked really well to quickly be able to identify what you are entering.
Certain Zones are considered to be Fortified and this means that they are tougher to break into. Some of the zones, such as Zone 26 (Mosque) identified by a red box around the area is a Fortified Zone by default. No unit may carry out movement called Flooding in a Fortified Zone. The Mosque area is a really interesting graphical representation as the background, as is the case with all of the areas, has the overhead satellite images of the Mosque shown on the board. In the game, this area cannot be entered by Marines but can be searched and entered by Iraqi Intervention Force (IIF) troops. I think that the red box really highlights this entry prohibition and is a key reminder to the player of the need for them to bring on the IIF troops although they might want to get more Marines on the board.
The IIF Troops holding box at the bottom of the board. There are 3 units stored here that can be brought onto the board at a later time. Notice the nice flag to the right and the id of the counter to the left using NATO symbols.
Each Zone on the board consists of several Locations in the form of boxes, which are used mostly to regulate movement. There are 5 types of Locations identified on the board including Open Ground, Courtyard, 1st Story with one of 3 notations including either l, 1′ or 1″), 2nd Story (2 and 2′) and Rooftop. Each Location is marked with one of these letters including OG, C, 1 or 2 and is a really well done part of the board which clearly identifies the type of Location. Locations are used for the placement of Suspect markers and certain Zones may have several Locations of the same type or no Locations at all of a particular type. Upon first glance, you might think that the color of the Suspect Markers, which are all tan with various shaded areas of brown and white, is a wrong choice and doesn’t necessarily work well visually with the sandy, tan colored board. But, because the Suspect Markers cover up the small boxes when placed, they still retain the thick brown outline on the outer edge of the board and these act as a visual highlighting of the unit. To me, this is a fantastic graphical design choice to highlight these important boxes and Zones as all of the action and most of the player’s focus will be on these areas as they move around the board block by block.
As in the case of these games, the on-board player aids and tracks need to be large, clear and have the pertinent information that the player will need to play the game. This is very well done on the board as they have created a circular Turn Track and Victory Point Track that are large and in the upper right hand corner of the board. This positioning really keeps the time deadline at the forefront of the players mind as they have to clear and control all 61 Zones for a victory. I say control but players must also eliminate resistance there as well and prevent the Suspect Markers from popping up in areas where they are adjacent to that have already been cleared and controlled.
One of the other really interesting parts of the game that causes a lot of tough decisions is the use of the military assets located on the bottom left hand side of the board. Here are tracked the player’s available Hornet Strikes, Super Cobra Support and UAV’s. All of these provide various benefits including DRM’s and direct attacks against fortified blocks to try to eliminate Suspect Markers without Marines having to put their life on the line in those areas.
I think that the graphic design for this board is truly excellent. I am not sure that it is beautiful but how it was done and how it works together is a stroke of genius and really took some thought and understanding of the game and its systems to be able to put together. These choices were reinforced with the color accents, use of lines and borders as well as with color choices for the most important Zones. Just a very well done and aesthetically pleasing package put together by Nicolas Roblin.
This game is just so very good and I love the decisions that the player has to make about how they go about clearing the areas with limited resources and under a time limit. Just a very good game design that shows how difficult this task was that was asked of the Marines.
If you are interested, I shot a short RAW video on the game during my first play and you can watch that at the following link:
We also did an unboxing video showing off the components and you can watch at the following:
If you are interested in Phantom Fury: Iraq, November 9, 2004 The Second Battle for Fallujah 2nd Edition, you can order a copy for 50.00 € ($58.37 in US Dollars) from the Nuts! Publishing website at the following link: https://www.nutspublishing.com/eshop/our-games/phantom-fury-v2-en
The next board that we will take a look at in the series is Almost a Miracle!: The Revolutionary War in the North in Against the Odds Magazine #51 from LPS, Inc.
Here are links to the previous entries in the series:
La Der des Ders – The War to End War from Hexasim is a 1-2 player slightly abstracted strategic level look at World War I. The game allows the players to relive the First World War at a strategic level, with each player controlling one of the 2 sides either the Entente, consisting of France, England, Russia, Serbia and other minor nations or the Central Powers including Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and a few minors. La Der des Ders can also be played solo, with a dedicated solitaire bot called “Athena” who utilizes special Cornflower Cards to make decisions about what technologies to invest in, where to undertake offensives and how to utilize limited resources and reinforcements. Each turn, players gain an amount of Resource Points dependent on what nations are in the war, which they can allocate to different areas to guide their overall strategy. Victory is achieved by launching offensives that drain the morale of enemy nations, forcing them out of the conflict through collapse.
In Action Point 1, we looked at the Game Board, discussing the Collapse Tracks, Trade Tracks, Russian Revolution Track and Naval Control Table and other various on-board tables and offensive spaces. In Action Point 2, we covered the Technology Phase and the Technology Tree and Technological Improvement Boards. In Action Point 3, we examined the Event Cards and how they inject the historical narrative into the gameplay and also alter the conditions of the game. In Action Point 4, we walked through an example of an Offensive and took a look at the combat procedure. In this Action Point, we will simply review the Victory Conditions.
Victory Conditions
In La Der des Ders, there are a few ways to trigger the concept of Sudden Death, which leads to the game concluding and a victor being declared, or to win the game through armistice being signed and then through the accumulation of Prestige Points. Let’s first take a look at what I think is the most common way for the game to come to an end, Sudden Death.
Sudden Death
The game will end immediately in the event of Sudden Death and this Sudden Death can be triggered in three ways. First, if France surrenders, the Central Powers will immediately win the game, second if Germany surrenders, the Entente will immediately win the game and finally if any one side achieves 6 Victory Points then that side immediately wins the game. Really pretty simple. If countries other than France or Germany surrender, such as Austria-Hungary, Russia or the Ottoman Empire, the game will continue although the Production Value of the surrendered country will no longer be included in the sides Resource Points.
Now there is a remote possibility that both sides could trigger Sudden Death at the same time through an attack. Remember, that if the attacker rolls a 1 on their Attack Dice, it will result a Counter Attack and 1 loss on their Collapse Track and if this would cause them to have to surrender as well as inflicting enough hits on their target to reach the end of their Collapse Track, both will Surrender and then neither side will win. But also, this could possibly occur with the play of the Spanish Flu Event, which causes losses to all powers. This is a rare possibility but it can happen.
One of the things that I very much like about this game is the concept of Collapse and the fatigue and weariness of war. World War I drug on for 4 long years and particularly on the Western Front very little ground was actually gained. During the early years of the war in 1915–1916, these advances were measured in mere feet, while later in the war during the campaigns of 1918, particularly in the case of the Hundred Days Offensive, which began on August 8, 1918, the Allies achieved deep, lasting breakthroughs, pushing the Germans back to their original 1914 lines. But the war was a meat grinder, plain and simple, and attacks were made sometimes to keep the war going because High Command demanded action and not necessarily to gain any ground or obtain any key objectives. Resources dwindled, troops dried up as men were shattered, maimed and demoralized to the point of being unable to stand a watch or fight, and nation’s desire for the war to continue faded. I think that at points, one breakthrough or catastrophic loss could have ended the war and this is very well reflected in La Der des Ders as if you are too low on your own Collapse Track and decide to attack because you believe you can finish your opponent you always have a chance of catastrophe and losses of your own while on the offensive.
Armistice
Aside from the Sudden Death ending, the game can end in 2 ways including at the end of the turn during which the Peace Negotiations card was drawn, or at the end of turn 14. In both of these cases, the side with the most Prestige Points is declared the winner. If there is a tie, the Central Powers will win the game.
So what are Prestige Points? Prestige Points are a concept that takes into account the standing of each of the combatant nations on both sides, using the location of the Sector cube on their Collapse Track as a base, and then uses a simple mathematical formula to determine the overall standing and condition of the nations morale, production and will to fight. One of the most important parts of this calculation though is that it only takes into account nations that have not collapsed and surrendered. If a nation has been forced to surrender because their Collapse Track reached the end, they will not count toward the Prestige Points of their allied side.
Each player will calculate their total Prestige Points very simply by paying attention to several numbers such as the Operational Value and Prestige Value. For each country still At War during the Armistice, the player multiplies the sector’s current Operational Value (OV), which is shown by the location of the Sector cube on the Collapse Track, by its Prestige Value (PV), which is the value printed on the left side of the Collapse Track. The various nations’ Prestige Values are Germany 5, France 4, Austria-Hungary 3, Ottoman Empire 3, Italy 3, Middle East 3 and all other Sectors 1.
Let’s take a look at a quick example of how to calculate Germany’s Prestige Points. If Germany is still At War and their Collapse Track is showing an Operational Value of 2, then we will multiply their Prestige Value shown on the far left of the Collapse Track of 5 x the Operational Value of 2 resulting in a total of 10 Prestige Points. The players then add the number of Victory Points (VP) indicated by the location of their marker on the Victory Point Track. You might be wondering Where do Victory Points come from? Victory Points are specifically earned from forcing countries to surrender and the side that caused the surrender will earn a number of Victory Points as shown in the rules. For the Entente, their values are Russia 3 VP, Italy, Middle East and Romania 2 VP and Serbia, Africa and Greece 1 VP. For the Central Powers, their values are Austria-Hungary 3 VP, the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria 2 VP and the German Colonies 1 VP.
I very much like the concept of only calculating the value for those countries who have not Collapsed and who are still in the war. We all know that it is easier to negotiate a peace that is favorable to your side when you are still a threat and if too many nations of either side have collapsed then their Prestige Points will reflect this as those countries won’t contribute to the final value. And I also like the simplicity of the scoring system. If certain key countries like France and Germany surrender, then that equates to a victory for the side causing the surrender and if the game continues to grind on through the final turn, then there is this calculation that is really pretty simple and gives importance to each goal with a different value that can be earned. Just a solid method for determining victory that makes sense and fits with the historical aspect of the outcome of the Great War.
In Action Point 6, which is the conclusion to this series, we will give an overview of the “Athena” solitaire bot and show how it works for solitaire play.
April is one of my favorite months due to Easter and the warming of the weather. And this month we got a good amount of newly baked wargames, still warm some of them because they are so new, for you to choose from. This month for the Wargame Watch I was able to find 28 games (including the 7 games from our sponsor VUCA Simulations). Interestingly though this was a cooler month for crowdfunding as I only found 4 different campaigns, which did contain a total of 6 games as one was a triple feature, featured on Kickstarter or Gamefound.
This month again we have a sponsor for the Wargame Watch in VUCA Simulations. VUCA Simulations is a newer German publisher that is really crushing it with their graphics and production. Their games are also very good and we have really enjoyed several of their titles including Donnerschlag: Escape from Stalingrad, Traces of War and most recently New Cold War.
But I also want to point your attention to their In Development Section of their website to show you all of the great projects that they are currently working on. Here there are 7 different games listed with pictures of the beautiful covers and a description of the game itself. These titles include Thirty Years of Misery designed by Brian Asklev, Pacific Fleet designed Hiroyuki Inose, The Far Seas designed by Martin Anderson, In Fours to Heaven designed by Grzegorz Kuryłowicz, Gateway to Falaise designed by Andrew Glenn, 1916 – Prelude to Blitzkrieg designed by Paul Hederer and Saint-Lô – The Capital of Ruins designed by Clemm.
VUCA is really doing a great job with their games and we recently played one of their newest games in Imperial Elegy: The Road to the Great War 1850-1920 and it was a sublime experience. We only played 1 full hand with a full table of 6 players, but very much enjoyed what it was that we were trying to do and the production is just fantastic. Can’t wait to get this one back to the table soon!
But now onto the games for April!
Pre-Order
1. Company of Heroes – Desert Warfare Expansion + Reprint from Bad Crow Games Currently on Gamefound
Glitz. Bits. Content. Miniatures. If these things appeal to you and you like a tactical wargame experience then this is your chance. The well regarded Company of Heroes System has a Gamefound campaign for a new expansion called Company of Heroes – Desert Warfare Expansion and they are also offering the base game 2nd Edition as an add-on as you need it to play.
From the game page, we read the following:
The Company of Heroes – Desert Warfare Expansion + Reprint on Gamefound brings the Deutsches Afrika Corps (DAK) to the 2nd Edition board game, featuring high-mobility, mechanized, and elite units. This expansion enhances solo/co-op play with improved AI, offering a fast-paced, tactical tabletop experience with armored, hit-and-run tactics. The Deutsches Africa Corps adds specialized, agile desert combat forces with a focus on armored vehicles, Italian alliance units, and fast, bold maneuvers. The expansion includes a sophisticated AI for solo or cooperative play, featuring an AI commander, HQ board, action deck, and target selection priority cards. The AI is described as aggressive, frequently seizing objectives. The expansion includes new maps, units, and components to expand the core game experience. The campaign also offers a reprint of the 2nd Edition core box, required to play, featuring streamlined rules and high-quality components.
I am going to be honest here. I played the 2nd Edition. We enjoyed it but it wasn’t necessarily as amazing as I thought it would be. I mean the systems are interesting but it feels more Euro game like than wargame like and it is also extremely expensive. Now it is gorgeous and the miniatures, terrain and maps are very well done but I am not sure that this game lives up to the hype. Just my humble opinion.
As of April 1st, the Gamefound campaign has funded and raised $948,465 toward its $100,000 funding goal with 1,928 backers. The campaign will conclude on Thursday, April 16, 2026 at 12:00am EST.
2. T-34 Leader: The World War II Ground Combat Solitaire Strategy Board Game from Dan Verssen Games Currently on Kickstarter
A good solitaire game is always very much welcome on my table. I usually start these entries about solitaire gaming by saying I am not a solitaire gamer. Well, after playing the Leader Series from DVG for the first time about 8 years ago, that statement no longer applies. I used to really only play solitaire games when I had no other choice or available opponents. But, when I put these games on the table, my whole opinion has changed. The Leader Series is a solitaire gaming system that recreates modern combat, including ground combat, air warfare and even submarine warfare and sees the player creating, managing and outfitting a group of soldiers/boats/planes over the course of a variable length campaign. Some of the games offer individual combat systems that are included in the overall game and each handles their theater with specific rules and equipment used historically. Originally, all of the games were designed by Dan Verssen but more recently other designers have been taking up the reigns of the series. Such is the case with their newest offering in the series T-34 Leader designed by Vincent Cooper.
From the game page, we read the following:
You are the commander of a Soviet army combat group in World War II. You will take command in the hardest fought campaigns from Operation Barbarossa (1941) to the Battle of Berlin (1945).
Each of your Campaigns involve both operational and tactical decisions. At the start of a Campaign, you select the Units and Commanders to make up your force. During each Week of the Campaign, you decide which Enemy Battalions to attack, which of your forces to allocate, and then resolve each Battle using the Tactical Battlefield. Your Commanders gain Experience with every Battle, but they also suffer Stress. Each Week you must decide how hard to push your men to achieve Victory. T-34 Leader is a great game for both experienced strategy gamers, as well as new players. Each Campaign takes around 30 minutes to set-up, and each Battle can be resolved in 15 to 30 minutes.
T-34 Leader has been designed from the ground up as a Solitaire wargame. It is not an adaptation of a 2-player wargame and the rules have been specifically designed for the solo player. As a Solitaire wargame, you can play whenever you have time, at your own pace. T-34 Leader is the latest Tank Leader game from DVG, following Tiger Leader and Sherman Leader.
With that look, I will let you know that I very much love Sherman Leader and the ground combat for me is where it is at and I would think that T-34 Leader will be more of the same but on the East Front. I have played Sherman Leader the most in the series, using both short and long campaigns, and really enjoy its systems, the structure of the AI and the management of your units and Commanders. Really engaging and enjoyable experience of ground combat in World War II.
Here is a link to my video review for Sherman Leader that you can view at the following link:
As of April 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has funded and raised $38,484 toward its $30,000 funding goal with 148 backers. The campaign will conclude on Tuesday, April 7, 2026 at 3:02pm EDT.
3. Chalice of Poison: The Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988 from GMT Games
We met Akar Bharadvaj while attending SDHistCon in 2023 and played his award winning design Tyranny of Blood: India’s Caste System Under British Colonialism, 1750-1947 and very much enjoyed the experience and talking with him about game design. Since that time, he has been working on another designer called Chalice of Poison: The Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988 from GMT Games, which was recently announced on their P500. Chalice of Poison is the first volume in a new series that models complex conflicts not only as clashes between adversaries in the air, land, and sea, but also as political struggles within the regimes and military forces fighting it.
From the game page, we read the following:
In 1980, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq invaded Iran, hubristically expecting to achieve a quick victory in a few weeks. Instead, the war became a brutal slog that lasted eight years. During the war, both countries had to choose between political and military objectives, balancing between the power of their military forces and the stability of their regimes. In Chalice of Poison you will play as the heads of two very different authoritarian regimes that have structured their militaries to be excellent at forestalling internal threats…but less effective at fighting foreign adversaries. Can you reform your military so that it’s effective enough to win the war, without accidentally creating a force that threatens your power?
A unique game on the Iran-Iraq War, the longest conventional war of the 20th century, and a historically important conflict underexplored in tabletop gaming.
Designed by Zenobia Award-winning designer Akar Bharadvaj, and inspired by Dr. Caitlin Talmadge’s academic research on the fundamental weakness of so-called “strong-man” authoritarian regimes.
Simple mechanics create a tense, dynamic, and meaningful decision space with an exciting narrative, capturing the dilemmas faced by regimes faced with both internal and external threats.
A two-player game that also plays well with four players on competing teams.
Includes two solitaire modes: A simple-to-operate “Al-Jazari” bot that offers a challenging non-player opponent. A more complex “Kissinger mode”—inspired by Mark Herman’s Peloponnesian War—in which the solitaire player represents both sides in the conflict. This mode abstractly models the international community, which cynically supported both sides in the conflict, ensuring a lengthy war in which neither country could win a decisive victory.
“At its most interesting, Chalice of Poison simulates warfare as a social battle as much as one involving tanks and bullets…This might sound complicated, but Bharadvaj presents these fluctuating power levels with refreshing clarity…Even at this early stage it’s an impressive and ambitious plaything. And its critique is unexpectedly timely, highlighting how strongman governments weaken their nations in the name of strengthening their regimes.” ~ Dan “Space-Biff” Thurot
4. Pericles: The Peloponnesian Wars 460-400 BC 2nd Printing from GMT Games
We are admitted Mark Herman fanboys! I am not ashamed of that statement as he is a very good designer and such an interesting person. He has designed a series of games called The Great Statesman Series and there are such fantastic mechanics at play that create a very interesting non-traditional wargame feeling such as Churchill. The 2nd game in the series is called Pericles, unlike Churchill, pits 2 sides, the Athenians and the Spartans against one another. The real game-changer is that each side is made up of two factions. As such it plays best with 4 players, each working to not only have their side win, but to have their faction within that side end with the most honor, and thus be victorious overall. The good news for most of us, is that there’s bots for solitaire, or 3 player games and there’s a fascinating 2 player variant, where each player plays a faction on each side. GMT just put a 2nd Printing up on their P500 and I am so very glad that this game will get some more attention as it is a really great game.
From the game page, we read the following:
Pericles is a ‘sandbox’ (unscripted) wargame that covers the ENTIRE period of conflict described in Thucydides classic history on the Peloponnesian wars. Pericles is a 4-player game, where two teams of Athenian and Spartan factions fight for Hegemony in 5th Century Greece. Each team of two represents a faction vying for control of their City States, strategy, and honor. Athens sees the Aristocrats debate issues with their opposing Demagogues, while in Sparta House Agiad and House Eurypontid contend for royal dominance.
Pericles uses elements from the Golden Geek best Wargame of 2015, Churchill, to simulate war as the extension of politics by other means. In the War portion of the game, it is US versus THEM (Athens versus Sparta), where each team implements their collective strategy to dominate Theaters of War, build economic strength, and fight battles to win Honor. In the respective Political assemblies, it is ME versus YOU (faction versus faction), where the battle for government control has to be balanced by your common interests in a series of wars that must be won, or all is lost.
Pericles uses an Issue Queue preplanning mechanic that the play testers have described as ‘insanely fun’. After your Political assembly has debated and won issues, these issues (military, league, diplomatic, oracle) are secretly placed on the military map in one of the twenty Theaters of war. If you or your opponents place a second issue into a Theater, it creates a queue of issues. Once all issues are placed, they are revealed and resolved one at a time. The order of issues in the queues and the order in which they are resolved across all Theaters tells YOUR story of the Peloponnesian wars.
Strategy in Pericles unfolds in how you create combinations of issues to achieve the historical narrative. Do you want to conduct a Periclean raiding strategy? Then you would play two military issues into a Theater to first move forces into position, then raid. Do you want to build a base in the enemy homeland (historically Pylos or Decelea)? Then you would conduct a military expedition, followed by a league issue. Do you want to raise an opponent’s ally in rebellion? Then you would deploy a diplomatic mission, and sow treachery for immediate or future advantage. It is in the placement, order, and resolution of the issues that the game allows you to explore and experience the broad range of historical situations without a script.
What would a game of Hoplites and Triremes be without a battle mechanic? Battle in Pericles is based on armies and fleets being led by the classic generals of yore, represented as Strategos tokens. During the Political assembly, each faction uses historical personalities to acquire Strategos tokens. Use the Spartan general Brasidas and gain four Strategos tokens, while Epitadas only generates one. Strategos tokens can be thought of as military capital that is spent in the war to lead and move forces. If you send forces to a Theater with enemy forces, a land or naval battle will occur. All players then secretly commit Strategos to the battle. Then, the commanding general of the military expedition and their teammate reveal their Strategos commitment and move wooden land and naval units to the battle. Now the defensive commitment of Strategos is revealed, each side then reveals a random battle card value, and the winner is decided. The winner of the battle now has the option to fight a subsequent naval or land battle. The outcome of these tactical decisions determines if any fortified bases are destroyed by assault or siege. Then the next issue is resolved. Winning battles awards and reduces honor.
Here is a link to our video review that was created when we were younger, had more hair and were not very polished in any part of what we were doing:
5. Silver Bayonet: The First Team in Vietnam, 1965 – 25th Anniversary Edition 2nd Printing from GMT Games
We have had a great experience playing Silver Bayonet a few times over the years and I am glad that it is now getting a 2nd Printing of the 25th Anniversary Edition. Silver Bayonet: The First Team in Vietnam, 1965 – 25th Anniversary Edition is a revamping of their first ever game released all the way back in 1990.
From the game page, we read the following:
Silver Bayonet recreates the pivotal November 1965 battle between a full North Vietnamese Army Division and the US 1st Air Cavalry Division in the Ia Drang Valley. NVA expertise in lure and ambush tactics resulted in significant US casualties. US mobility and the ability to bring massive amounts of firepower to bear quickly virtually destroyed the attacking NVA division and forced a change in NVA tactics.
This re-issue of GMT Games’ 1990 CSR Award winning title that started it all keeps the original operational system, but streamlines to it to include innovative combat resolution integrating maneuver combat, close assault, artillery bombardment, and support from gunships and air sorties.
Increased accessibility to primary and secondary source material has made it possible to make changes to more accurately represent both sides’ unique capabilities without significantly altering or breaking the base game system. The major changes involve patrols, ambushes, landing zones, and the 1st Cav Brigade HQ, while minor changes tweak movement, combat, and coordination game mechanics to showcase radically different strengths and weaknesses the FWA and NVA force brought to the battles in the Ia Drang Valley.
6. I, Napoleon 2nd Edition Update Kit from GMT Games
As you probably know, normally Ted Raicer designs hard core hex and counter wargames such as The Dark Valley: East Front Campaign, 1941-45, The Dark Sands: War in North Africa, 1940-42 and The Dark Summer: Normandy, 1944. These games are fantastic experiences that are true wargames. But, he also has an eclectic side to him and has designed one of the classic card driven games on the subject of World War I in Paths of Glory. So when I heard that he had designed an interesting looking card based historical role-playing game the first thought that came to my mind was “How is he going to accomplish this feat?” Last year, I played I, Napoleon and did enjoy what it was doing even though it felt like it fell a bit short of its ultimate claim. But there is more of the game now and they are doing this Update Kit in case those who want to the updated cards don’t wish to order the Limits of Glory Expansion.
From the game page, we read the following:
For our customers who own the 1st Printing of I, Napoleon and want to upgrade to the 2nd Printing without purchasing the Limits of Glory Expansion, we’re providing an Update Kit.
This Kit includes:
60 Updated Cards
2 Divider Cards (1 New, 1 Adjusted)
Rulebook
Playbook
8.5″x11″ Player Aid
Sticker Sheet (4 stickers to update the Game Board)
NOTE: The Limits of Glory Expansion includes the updated Cards, Divider Cards and Sticker Sheet, as well as a Rulebook, Playbook and Player Aid that can be used with both the expansion and base game.
7. Paper Wars Magazine Issue #116: Roma Invicta: The Roman Republic 400-50BC from Compass Games
Wargame magazines can be a bit hit and miss with their games. But, Paper Wars seems to really pick some great topics and systems to highlight in their pack-in games and this month there is a new pre-order for a game called Roma Invicta: The Roman Republic, 400-50 BC designed by Paul Kallia who did Roma Victrix: Campaigns of the Roman World from Compass Games.
From the game page, we read the following:
Roma Invicta: The Roman Republic & the Western Mediterranean by Paul Kallio is a 2-player, scenario-based design depicting several historic conflicts that occurred in and around the Roman Republic between 400 and 50 BC. This is a systemic brother design to Paul Kallio’s Roma Victrix boxed game. Each game turn represents one year. Infantry unit types include legions, heavy infantry, auxiliaries, and barbarians, and represent about 5,000 men each.
BONUS GAME MATERIAL: This issue will include two new scenarios for play with WWII Campaigns: 1940, 1941, and 1942. For 1941, we have Festung Stalingrad. It covers the German counteroffensive to try to save the Sixth Army trapped in Stalingrad in December 1942. For 1940, we have the Operation Matador variant scenario by David Meyler.
Article highlights include previews of Rise to Glory and Iberian Tide, a work-in-progress report on Island Infernos, a Bitter Woods AAR, an alternate start scenario for Desert Tide, and a new optional fuel dump rule for The Last Gamble.
8. Limits of Glory: Campaigns VI & VII – Jersey New Jersey and A Strong War: The Conflict for North America 1755-60 from Form Square Games Coming to Gamefound April 7th
A few years ago, we became acquainted with Andrew Rourke through his Coalitions design from PHALANX that went on to a successful crowdfunding campaign and has recently been delivered. He has since been a busy guy with starting his own publishing company called Form Square Games and also publishing the first 5 designs in a new series called Limits of Glory that will take a look at the campaigns of Napoleon and other contemporary conflicts. In Campaign I, which is called Bonaparte’s Eastern Empire, the game is focused on the campaign of the French in Egypt between 1798 and 1801. Campaigns II, III and IV was Maida 1806 and Santa Maura & Capri. Campaign V was Donning the Sacred Heart which covers the Vendee Civil War and just recently fulfilled as I have my copy sitting on my gaming table awaiting and unboxing video.
And now, recently, he has announced came out about the next entry in the series which is a two-fer with Campaigns VI and VII called Jersey New Jersey and is set during the American Revolutionary War but also a 2nd game called A Strong War set during the French & Indian War. I think that these games are well timed with this year being the 250th Anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and I look forward to playing and exploring both of these games. I have also reached out to Andrew to see about him as well as the design duo of Mark Kwasny and John Kwasny for A Strong War doing another interview to give us a look inside the design and get more information for you to digest before the campaign kicks off on April 7th. But at this point the games look great and I love the art and the covers are very eye catching for sure!
From the game page, we read the following:
For the 2 games in the Limits of Glory Series:
Two exciting games in one box, Jersey covers the little known 1781 invasion by the French of the Island of Jersey as part of the American Revolutionary War. The game examines the impact of luck on events and challenges the skill of players to use their commanders to influence these events.
New Jersey covers the famous crossing of the Delaware and the battles of Trenton and Princeton using the same Limits of Glory System to test players ability to mitigate what luck throws at them by the skillful use of commanders and troop positioning.
Limits of Glory represents military campaigns at the highest command level, players take the role of theater commander and must manage their resources of men, material and skill to emerge victorious.
And for the other game in the offering called A Strong War: The Conflict for North America 1755-60:
The title, A Strong War, refers to the type of war the Abenaki Nation threatened to unleash on the land-grabbing British in 1753. The sparks of war, ignited in 1754 near Fort Duquesne by an obscure colonel of Virginia militia, George Washington, spread quickly; soon, flames engulfed the entire globe as England and France vied for control of empire. Over the next 5 years, Regular regiments from the French and British armies, American and French-Canadian provincial units, and Native warriors all fought in a chaotic and violent series of campaigns and frontier raids that culminated in the British conquest of French Canada and the defeat of the Native Nations (most of which had sided with the French).
A Strong War brings this war to life in a simple, fast-playing game. The map (covering the region stretching from Louisbourg to Alexandria, and from New York to Lake Erie) uses point-to-point connections to highlight the key locations that were targeted during the war. Using wooden cubes to represent the different types of forces used (French and British Regulars, British Colonials, French-Canadian Marines, French Bush Rangers, and Native American warriors), each player has only a few pieces (maximum 13 for the British and 10 for the French) to use each turn (one turn = one year, so there are 6 turns/years total).
The heart of the game is the unique combat system where players can deploy forces to a chosen battle and then commit them one by one; or they can call off the battle if it goes badly and save some of those forces for use later in the year. The types of forces committed also play a critical role in combat – the British want to mass their Regulars but the French want to bring in a mixed force to take advantage of the different skill sets each provides. Thus, tension is created in trying to decide if/when (or where) it is best to commit one’s forces: do you avoid combat completely; do you call off a combat that is going badly; or, do you go all in and commit your entire force? But if you lose a battle, initiative then swings to your opponent who may then launch an offensive. Each player has several paths to victory, leading to a “different” game each time, and forcing players to choose between different strategies each turn. Finally, it is a quick game, taking just a couple of minutes to set up, and usually taking less than an hour to play to completion. The game also plays well solitaire, though there is no dedicated solitaire system.
9. Campaign: Operation Bagration from Catastrophe Games Currently on Kickstarter
A few years ago, I played and very much enjoyed a cool little solitaire WWII card-driven game called Campaign: Fall Blau from Catastrophe Games and designer Martin Melbardis where the player attempted to breach the Soviet defenses on the East Front in the pivotal German summer campaign of 1942. The game system is very playable and simple, but has some strategic depth to it as the player has to make a lot of choices about what to go after, how to manage their scarce resources (fuel) and what generals to use to take advantage of their special abilities to amass enough VP to claim victory over the Soviet Union. They now have the counter punch of that game in a new entry in the series called Campaign: Operation Bagration and it is currently being offered on Kickstarter.
From the game page, we read the following:
Campaign: Operation Bagration is the follow-up to Campaign: Fall Blau, the acclaimed solo experience of trying to seize Stalingrad and the prized oil fields beyond. In this game the shoe is on the other foot, as you will be pushing the Red Army to retake the center of the occupied Soviet Union, setting up the capture of Berlin. Stalin is expecting fast results though, so once again you will be racing against the clock trying to achieve enough objectives before your supplies (and Stalin’s patience) runs out.
Campaign: Operation Bagration is a solitaire wargame that takes place during WWII and puts the player in charge of the Soviet summer offensive of 1944 against Army Group Center, code named operation Bagration. Pick your three generals and use your resources wisely in order to obtain your campaign’s objectives.
One month turns. Decide which card (objective) to go after, each with a unique set of Soviet defenses. Manage supplies required for each offensive, or choose to take an operational pause. Receive random event cards that are mostly beneficial but a few are Soviet counterattacks that can throw a serious monkey-wrench into your plans. Play continues until fall begins, and you must report to Stalin with your success or failure.
In order to meet Stalin’s expectations you need to be relentless, while carefully marshalling your troops and material. Drive too hard, and the Germans will crush one of your wings, and your push will stall out. But if you move too slow you know you will be summoned to a special meeting with Stalin, and that is a grim fate.
As of April 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has funded and raised $1,138 toward its $500 funding goal with 14 backers. The campaign will conclude on Monday, April 20, 2026 at 8:51pm EDT.
New Release
1. VaeVictis Magazine Issue #185 Game Edition: Storm on the Ménez Hom 1944 from VaeVictis
VaeVictis is a very fine wargame magazine and they always have very interesting looking pack-in games on various subjects. This month, they have featured a scenario involving the 1944 attack on the Ménez-Hom peak on the Crozon peninsula in a game called Storm on the Ménez Hom 1944. But there is more as the magazine features articles on various wargames including Hubris from GMT Games, La Der des Ders from Hexasim, Thunder on the Mississippi from Multi-Man Publishing, Italia 1917-1918 from Nuts! Publishing, New Cold War from VUCA Simulations, Werwolf from Legion Wargames and many more.
From the game page, we read the following:
During the siege of Brest, the coastal batteries on the Crozon peninsula, on the southern shore of the harbor, were hindering the advance of the US Army. It was therefore crucial to silence them. To achieve this, the barrier closing off the peninsula had to be breached: the Ménez-Hom peak, rising to 330 meters. This mission was entrusted to the FFI-FTP battalions of central Finistère. It took three weeks, from August 12th to September 1st, 1944, and the reinforcement of a US cavalry brigade to finally defeat the German, Russian, and Caucasian defenders.
2. The Coming Storm II: Quadrigames of the Fourth Coalition: October 1806-June 1807 from Operational Studies Group
Large Napoleonic wargames are always interesting. Operational Studies Group does some big games on the subject and their newest offering is called The Coming Storm II: Quadrigames of the Fourth Coalition: October 1806-June 1807 and deals with four different battles including Jena-Auerstadt, Pultusk/Golymin, Eylau and Friedland.
From the game page, we read the following:
These four games explore the major battles of 1806–07, where the French Army encountered two different opponents with different capabilities, from the leadership-challenged Prussians in Saxony to the chaotic battle conditions in winter against the Russians. Based on OSG’s Special Studies, which provide a turn-by-turn narrative of the four battles. Each game shows the approach to the battlefield on the day before battle. The Jena-Auerstadt game has both battlefields on one map and allows both sides to redeploy before battle.
We are offering a new edition, with new maps—not too much different in detail—but rendered in Charles Kibler’s naturalistic style. TCS2 will be updated to use the Universal Deck and latest series rules (deck not included). With few exceptions, the counters will be identical to the first edition.
This is a very popular series of games amongst Grognards and I have heard many people recommend these titles to both of us. We have yet to take the plunge and get one but one day we will…one day!
If you are interested in The Coming Storm II: Quadrigames of the Fourth Coalition: October 1806-June 1807, you can order a copy for $140.00 from the Operational Studies Group website at the following link: https://napoleongames.com/products/the-coming-storm-ii
3. The Maid Ascendant: The Siege of Orleans, October 1428-May 1429 from High Flying Dice Games
Paul Rohrbaugh and his company High Flying Dice Games is a designer I love to follow. He is always doing games on smaller or lesser known conflicts and I just find his work to be superb and really draws me in. Recently I saw where he was releasing a game on the Siege of Orleans and I do like siege games! The game is called The Maid Ascendant and really looks pretty interesting and is definitely a unique subject for a game.
From the game page, we read the following:
The Maid Ascendant is an introductory level wargame on the siege of Orleans. The siege marked the debut of Joan of Arc as a military commander, and a campaign that would see the English eventually evicted from France and the end of the Hundred Years War.
“Begone, or I will make you go!” – Jeanne d’Arc’s command to English and Burgundian troops besieging Orleans.
If you are interested in The Maid Ascendant: The Siege of Orleans, October 1428-May 1429, you can order a copy for $16.95 from the High Flying Dice Games website at the following link: https://www.hfdgames.com/maid.html
4. Mr. Lincoln’s War from Compass Games
You can’t have enough good American Civil War games and Compass Games has been working to bring out a new edition of a classic called Mr. Lincoln’s War designed by Mark McLaughlin.
From the game page, we read the following:
Mr. Lincoln’s War is a historical game which captures the epic struggle of the American Civil War. From their first major battle at Bull Run in 1861, through the campaigns of Vicksburg, Gettysburg and Atlanta and until the final days at Appomattox in 1865, the armies of the Union and the Confederacy raged across America wreaking havoc and bloodshed on a scale never before or since witnessed in the New World.
This box set is organized into two sub-games, “Army of the Tennessee,” which deals with the war in the western theater, and “Army of the Potomac,” which deals with the war in Virginia. Each has four short scenarios that recreate the maneuvers and battles of Shiloh, Gettysburg, Atlanta, and other monumental Civil War contests. Campaign games enabling the players to fight the war in the West or East are provided with each sub-game. They may be combined to play the Mr. Lincoln’s War grand campaign that simulates the entire Civil War, on both fronts.
5. Volume II Civil War Heritage Series Army of the Potomac: Campaigns of 1862 and 1864 from GMT Games
Several years ago, Mark Herman designed a very unique and simple American Civil War game called Gettysburg that appeared in C3i Magazine #32. That game became the basis for his Civil War Heritage Series with the first volume being Rebel Fury that focused on five battles from the Chancellorsville and Chickamauga Campaigns. He has long mentioned working on the follow-up to that game and we finally are getting it with Army of the Potomac.
From the game page, we read the following:
Army of the Potomac: Campaigns of 1862 and 1864 is the second volume in the Civil War HeritageSeries and the follow-up game to the innovative and acclaimed Rebel Fury. Army of the Potomac uses the same core rules as Rebel Fury, so players familiar with Rebel Fury will be able to jump right into the action. Each battle in Army of the Potomac is quick-set-up, quick-playing, and deeply interactive. The density of counters in each scenario is low, allowing you to see and experience the big picture of the battle.
Army of the Potomac covers the battles of Spotsylvania II, North Anna River, Cold Harbor, and the entire Seven Days battle (McClellan vs. Lee), including the prelude Seven Pines (McClellan vs. Johnson) when Johnson’s wounding brought Lee into the command of the Army of Northern Virginia. Each battle places you, the player, in the role of the Army Commander (Grant, McClellan, Lee, Johnson). You maneuver your army to find the enemy’s flanks, concentrate your forces for an attack, and determine where to commit your artillery assets.
I think that one of the most interesting parts is that this new game can be played with Rebel Fury as also included are two bonus scenarios to allow owners of Rebel Fury to fight Spotsylvania II and begin the Campaign scenario from Wilderness to Cold Harbor using their original Rebel Fury map.
Last summer, while attending WBC in late July, we sat down with Mark Herman and did an interview/overview of Army of the Potomac and you can watch that video at the following link:
6. Baltic Empires: The Northern Wars of 1558-1721 from GMT Games
This one is very much anticipated by me and I feel like I have been waiting in it forever since its announcement in 2022. Baltic Empires is a grand looking game that focuses on the conflicts between the states of the Baltic region during the early modern era. The wait is now over as they game is set to ship on April 17th.
From the game page, we read the following:
Baltic Empires is an approachable 2-5 player strategy game about conflicts between the states of the Baltic region during the early modern era, a transformative period of religious conflict, large scale warfare, and constant struggles for power. Players will have to develop their economy, strengthen their administration, secure trade hubs, and finally build armies to become the dominant power of the Baltics. Denmark-Norway, Sweden, Russia, Poland-Lithuania, and Prussia will fight for hegemony, using variable victory conditions that reflect their respective historical objectives.
During the 16th & 17th centuries, religious conflicts between Protestants and Catholics swept Europe, vast colonies were established by the maritime powers, and a series of wars were fought against Louis XIV’s Kingdom of France to maintain the balance of power, eventually culminating in the War of Spanish Succession. While this history might be familiar to many, the related conflicts around the Baltic Sea that took place during these centuries are less well-known.
Where did the French, English, and Dutch acquire the materials they needed to build and maintain their vast navies that won them their colonial empires? Where did they acquire the food they needed to feed their sailors and growing populations? Where did the Swedish juggernaut that suddenly emerged and changed the course of the Thirty Years War come from, and why didn’t its great power status last? How did the Russian and Prussian Empires that became so powerful in later periods first emerge on the European stage? The Baltic region was crucial to the history of Europe, and the conflict for influence over the Baltic Sea was closely intertwined with the balance of power in Western Europe. The outcome of the wars and societal transformation in the Baltic region, from the collapse of the Teutonic Order in Livonia in 1558 to the end of the Great Northern War in 1721, shaped European and world history up until the present day.
Baltic Empires presents these less well-known conflicts in a fun and accessible format, while also doing justice to the fascinating history of the Baltic Sea region during this period. The game features 5 asymmetric factions with different strengths, forces, and historical objectives, along with the capacity to develop their states by investing in economic infrastructure and recruiting key historical characters that offer unique game effects. The game also includes several scenarios for variable player counts and durations, offering additional flexibility and replayability.
7. Three Days of Gettysburg Deluxe Edition from GMT Games
A very popular series featuring one of the most gamed battles of the American Civil War! Quite the combination. And to add to that, a Deluxe Edition treatment with new counters, some new rules, new and updated maps and lots of scenarios. This is a great value for any gamer who wants to game one of the most iconic battles of the American Civil War.
From the game page, we read the following:
GMT Games and the GBACW design team are proud to announce Three Days of Gettysburg Deluxe Edition, the ultimate edition of the definitive game on the Battle of Gettysburg. First published in 1995, 3DoG has stood the test of time as one of the most popular games of the Great Battles of the American Civil WarSeries.
This series is one of the hobby’s longest-lived design concepts, springing from the legendary regimental level Gettysburg game—Terrible Swift Sword (SPI)—designed by Richard Berg in 1976. Under GMT, the rules system has remained stable but has shown remarkable flexibility to allow each game to smoothly incorporate additional rules to reflect the historical battles. The series relies on interactive chit-pull mechanics to simulate the often-chaotic nature of the 19th Century battlefield at the regimental level.
Three Days of Gettysburg Deluxe Edition will include ten plus scenarios. They range from small Skirmisher contests on half sized maps to the ultimate Gettysburg experience on four full full-sized maps depicting the entire battle, including the East Cavalry Battlefield! Other scenarios will depict both the first and second day of the struggle. Experienced players will be able to play many of the scenarios in one sitting. The 3DoG Deluxe Edition will include many exclusive rules to represent the special situations at Gettysburg, including new Skirmisher rules. However, many of the rules are optional, allowing players to decide for themselves what level of complexity they want.
New components and exclusive rules include new cavalry counters, CSA dismounted cavalry counters, corrected artillery types, two types of skirmisher units, artillery sections for some scenarios (Calef’s battery on the first day!), and artillery overshoot. The new maps continue to use Mark Simonitch’s beautiful artwork but include stonewalls, the Devil’s Den, and sloping hexes to better represent the unique terrain at Gettysburg. The large rock formations are represented differently from earlier editions, and artillery will find moving up the slopes of Little Round Top as difficult in the game as it was in the battle.
And just take a look at this big beautiful map of the game….by the talented Mark Simonitch!
8. Dreams of Empire Expansion Kit – Seeds of Empire: The Wars of South & Central India, 1730’s-1750’s from Red Sash Games
Red Sash Games have a reputation for very large, very long playing games that are focused on interesting historical events. This month, they announced their newest offering with their printing partner Blue Panther and it is an expansion to their Seeds of Empire game focused on the wars in South & Central India during the 1730’s through the 1750’s. The game is called Dreams of Empire Expansion Kit – Seeds of Empire: The Wars of South & Central India, 1730’s-1750’s and really looks to be pretty interesting.
From the game page, we read the following:
Seeds of Empire is the second in a series of operational war games covering conflict in India during the 18th Century, using Red Sash Games’ LaceWars rules. SOE extends the environment of Dreams of Empire to include the whole of Central India (the Deccan) and extends the timeline into the 1750s to cover the Second Carnatic War.
The expansion includes several new Powers, divides the Marathas into Clans, and adds Factions for the two — not one, but two — major succession crises simultaneously taking place in the Deccan and Carnatic. This is the period when John Company, the British East India Company, finally got involved in the geopolitics of the Subcontinent. It was the highwater mark of the French presence, and a watershed for the Maratha Confederacy, while for the Mughal Empire it was a period of steep decline.
Seeds of Empire offers eight unique scenarios:
The Second Carnatic War: this scenario uses only the original map set (most of the action took place in a very confined area). Featuring the return of Chanda Sahib and Governor Dupleix, with Bussy-Castelneau, Clive of India, Stringer Lawrence (Father of the Indian Army), and above all, Mohammad Ali Khan.
“Early Start”: An ‘early start’ variant of the same scenario in which Chanda Sahib has the opportunity to slay Anwar ud-Din (or vice versa). Historically the death of Anwar kicked off the Second Carnatic War.
“Capture of Devikotta”: An even earlier start that allows the players to simulate the EIC‘s capture of Devikotta from Tanjore under the guise of restoring the Raja.
“French in the Deccan”: A ‘French in the Deccan’ scenario using only the new maps, focusing on the war for control of the Viceroyalty of the Deccan and the activities of the various Maratha clans.
“Deccan + Dreams of Empire”: A 1740s Deccan sandbox scenario matching the timeline of the original DOE Campaign Game, showing what the Marathas were getting up to.
“Full Territory”: A Campaign Game for the Second Carnatic War that combines the maps.
“Both Carnatic Wars”: A Campaign Game for the 1740s combining the original DOE Campaign with the 1740s Deccan scenario. This scenario can be extended to create a Grand Campaign covering the period of both Carnatic Wars.
“Malabar War”: A small scenario set in Malabar, showcasing the continued expansion of Travancore against Cochin and its allies.
Like Dreams of Empire, Seeds of Empire assigns the various Powers to the players as and when they Activate. However, the Second Carnatic War also creates semi- permanent Alliances, with the French on one side and the British on the other, though only acting as ‘auxiliaries’ to the great Indian lords.
To help the players cope with the material, the original rules, scenarios, charts, and (some) displays have been duplicated, with the new material from Seeds of Empire inserted into the relevant places. The expansion also includes errata and small fixes to the game system.
This is not a complete game and will requires ownership of Dreams of Empire to play.
If you are interested in Dreams of Empire Expansion Kit – Seeds of Empire: The Wars of South & Central India, 1730’s-1750’s, you can order a copy for $240.00 from the Blue Panther website at the following link: https://www.bluepantherllc.com/products/seeds-of-empire
9. Ace of Aces: Powerhouse SeriesDeluxe Edition from Mr. B Games
A classic reborn is how I would classify the next offering on this list. With very unique mechanics trying to provide the experience of dueling it out with an enemy biplane over the fields of World War I, Ace of Aces is now making a comeback with the Powerhouse Series rebirth all the way from 1981.
From the game page, we read the following:
Ace of Aces: Powerhouse is an exciting game of World War 1 aerial dogfighting. Each player is the pilot of a fighter plane in the skies over France trying to shoot down their opponent. The players each have a book that shows the position of their opponent, and what maneuvers they can perform to line up their machine guns on their target. Through an innovative matrix system, the players can fly through the sky and attempt to drive away their enemy. Each game takes 15-20 minutes to complete!
The mechanic used in this series is a very cool little flip book called a Dogfighting Book that has various pictures representing the maneuvers of your plan and the enemies. These flip books are nicely crafted and there is one for both the German Fokker DVII and the British SPAD XIII.
10. Commander: Romans v Dacians – A Solitaire Wargame from Mike Lambo
Over the past several years, print and play solitaire wargames have gained a lot of traction in our hobby. A solitaire wargame that is very affordable at $10-$15 and can be purchased and downloaded online. What is not to like? And the name of Mike Lambo has been tied to a lot these games as he has designed 20+ of these titles and has built quite the rabid and loyal fanbase. His newest game is called Commander: Romans v Dacians – A Solitaire Wargame and can be downloaded from Wargame Vault.
From the game page, we read the following:
In the rugged hills and forests of ancient Dacia (today located in the European country of Romania) Rome fights a war unlike any it has faced before. The legions advance into a land of ridges, valleys and fierce tribal resistance, where every skirmish can turn the tide of battle. You command a small Roman force consisting of legionaries, praetorian guard, cavalry, archers, and spearmen, tasked with holding the line, breaking the enemy, or seizing vital ground before the Dacian horde overwhelms you. Opposing you are the warriors of King Decebalus – swift, unpredictable, ferocious and deadly. Cavalry smash into formations with startling power, warriors surge forward in wild charges, swordsmen hold the line with grim resolve, and archers and falxmen harass and surprise from the rear. Each battle unfolds differently as both armies are drawn at random, events disrupt your plans, and reinforcements arrive to mix things up.
This is a tense solo wargame of tactical decision making and battlefield chaos. Every turn demands adaptation and every clash counts. No two battles will ever play the same, and victory is never guaranteed until it is achieved.
In the game, the Player will be commanding the units of the Roman Empire as they battle a seemingly endless stream of fierce Dacian fighters.
This game is a solitaire wargame. You play the game, and the enemy is controlled by the game (or ‘AI’). You will need three standard six-sided dice to play. It is recommended that the counters provided on the final page of the game are used to play this game (especially for the units). Simply stick them to card and cut them out. A video demonstrating how generally to do this can be found on the Mike Lambo Games YouTube channel.
As usual, thanks so much for reading along and sticking with me this month as I navigated through the many websites and game pages looking for new and interesting games to share.
Finally, thanks once again to this month’s sponsor VUCA Simulations!
With this My Favorite Wargame Cards Series, I hope to take a look at a specific card from the various wargames that I have played and share how it is used in the game. I am not a strategist and frankly I am not that good at games but I do understand how things should work and be used in games. With that being said, here is the next entry in this series.
#71: The Wartburg from Here I Stand: Wars of the Reformation, 1517-1555 from GMT Games
Here I Stand: Wars of the Reformation 1517-1555 is an experience packaged in a game that attempts to boldly cover the political and religious conflicts of early 16th Century Europe. The game focuses on the struggle of religious reformers such as Martin Luther, John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli as they battle the Papacy for changes in their views of God and religion. But it is more than just the Holy War as it deals with the other European countries involved in the affairs of the time including France, England, the mighty Hapsburg Empire and the Ottoman Empire in the east. They all played a role in the process of the Reformation and the design brilliantly weaves this all together into an interesting and engaging experience. The game also covers other plot lines and events of the period, including wars, marriages and ascendancies to thrones, using a unique Card Driven Game (CDG) system that models both the political and religious conflicts of the period.
Today, I want to take a look at a very interesting Response card in The Wartburg. Response cards in Here I Stand are event cards that can be played out of turn to interrupt the actions of an opponent or provide immediate reactions to specific game events. Response cards are often used to negate, mitigate, or enhance events and combats, and they may be played during an opponent’s impulse, provided the text allows for this asynchronous timing. These cards also tend to have specific pre-requisites that must be met in order to play the card and The Wartburg states that the card is “only playable by Protestants, and Luther must be alive”. The card itself allows the Protestant player to cancel the play of a card as an event but cannot cancel a Mandatory Event. The card however can cancel the play of the Papal Bull or Leipzig Debate Papal Home Cards, which is probably the way that the card will mostly be used. The card will not only cancel the play of the event but will also end the impulse of the player playing the card. This can be very powerful and when played at the right time can be a game saver for the Protestant player.
For example, in our most recent play at Buckeye Game Fest, I was playing as the Protestants and Bill Simoni as the Papacy. After the forming of the Schmalkaldic League and the Protestants changing into a military power, the focus of the other players turned toward me as I was doing well and near victory. They all then decided to declare war on the Protestants and began to advance upon and attack my fortified Electorates to take away VP I had earned by having both religious and political control in 5 of the 6 as the League was formed. As we came into turn 5, I was at 24 VP and ultimately came up shy of a victory by 1 point at the time. I had been able to take over the entirety of England and change every space and also get about 5-6 spaces in France, but now the Papal Bull came to play and Bill fought me back and forth with him taking over 3-4 spaces followed by me reclaiming 3-4 spaces. It was a beautiful game of back and forth and I used every tool at my disposal to fight him including The Wartburg card to stop the untimely excommunication of Zwingli before he could attempt to embarrass him in a debate. That card play at that very time saved me or most likely he would have used Eck who is his best debater against Zwingli who is just average and I would have lost leading to him being burnt at the stake giving him VP or by allowing him to turn over a few of my hard fought converted spaces back to Catholicism.
The only problem with this card is that it commits Luther so he will be unavailable to be chosen directly to debate during the rest of the turn. But this was a small price to pay at that time and ultimately led to me being able to hold on through the end of Turn 6 where I won a Protestant victory on the tie breaker with England.
Martin Luther stayed at Wartburg Castle from May 1521 to March 1522 under the alias “Junker Jörg” (Knight George) to hide from papal and imperial authorities. During these 300 days of protective custody, he translated the New Testament into German in just 11 weeks, wrote numerous theological works, and grappled with spiritual turmoil. His greatest accomplishment at Wartburg Castle was his translating of the New Testament from Koine Greek into German, which laid the foundation for a unified German language and made the Bible accessible to ordinary people. He also wrote numerous works, including Against Latomus and several tracts. He began his attack on monastic vows during this time, arguing they were contrary to faith. Luther used his time in exile for intense study and writing, referring to his stay as his “Patmos”, referring to the Apostle John’s exile to the Island of Patmos in 95AD. While here though he also experienced significant psychological distress and temptation. According to legend, he threw his inkwell at the devil during a confrontation, leaving a stain on the wall. His exile was organized by Frederick the Wise after the Diet of Worms and the stay was designed to keep Luther safe from those looking for him, ensuring the survival of his reform movement.
Last month, as I was trolling the internet, I came across a new solitaire game from the guys over at War Diary Publications called Battle of the Bismarck Sea designed by Allyn Vannoy. Battle of the Bismarck Sea is a solitaire wargame that uses individual ships and flights/squadrons of aircraft. The Player assumes the role of General George Kenney, Commander of the 5th U.S. Army Air Force, with the mission of intercepting the Japanese effort to reinforce its ground forces on the island of New Guinea. I am always into a good Pacific Theater of Operations game and I reached out to Allyn to get some inside information about the design.
Grant: Allyn welcome to our blog. First off please tell us a little about yourself. What are your hobbies? What’s your day job?
Allyn: I’m retired, having worked 18 years for Intel as a program manager. Presently, I work for a minor league baseball team in the summer, an affiliate of the Arizona Diamond Backs, and volunteer two days a week at the Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum in McMinnville, Oregon, both in the Archives and giving tours of Howard Hughes’ Spruce Goose; I also write (freelance) for a number of military history and gaming magazines.
Grant: What motivated you to break into game design? What have you enjoyed most about the experience thus far?
Allyn: During Covid, I started getting back into gaming, having become interested in Avalon Hill games in the 60’s and as an early subscriber to S&T Magazine. I enjoy the challenge of trying to turn history into a game—a teaching tool—in the process I learn more and hopefully, understand more.
Grant: What is your new game Battle of the Bismarck Sea about?
Allyn: The Battle of the Bismarck Sea, 1943, was the 5th Air Force’s attempt to interrupt the Japanese effort to reinforce its ground forces on the island of New Guinea. The Player must utilize the limited resources available and determine their application over the 10-week period that operations are conducted. The results of these efforts will be borne out in the effectiveness of air operations.
Grant: What games gave you used for inspiration for your design?
Allyn: I hadn’t seen anything like this design; I wanted to make something new and hopefully unique.
Grant: What is important to model or include in a game about the Air Naval combat in the Pacific during WWII?
Allyn: The most important thing to understand is how to organize and implement an air strike force to accomplish the mission given.
Grant: What type of research did you do to get the historical details correct? What one must read source would you recommend?
Allyn: I tried to locate good and detailed sources:
Arbon, J. and Christensen, Chris. The Bismarck Sea Ran Red; Walsworth Press, Marceline, MO, 1979.
Birdsall, Steve. Flying Buccaneers: The Illustrated Story of Kenney’s Fifth Air Force; Doubleday, NY, 1977.
Henebry, John P. The Grim Reapers at Work in the Pacific Theater: The Third Attack Group of the U.S. Fifth Air Force; Pictorial Histories Publishing Company, Missoula, MT, 2002.
Jablonski, Edward. Outraged Skies; Doubleday and Co., Inc., Garden City, NY. 1971.
McAulay, Lex. Battle of the Bismarck Sea; St. Martin’s Press, NY, 1991.
Recommendation: McAulay’s book, Battle of the Bismarck Sea.
Grant: What challenges did the subject cause for the design? How have you overcome them?
Allyn: The design initially focused just on the single action that occurred on March 2-4, 1943, but there was a larger struggle that began in January 1943—that Allied commanders realized they needed to adapt and change their forces and tactics if they were to meet the challenge they faced. Once the design was expanded to a 10-week time frame it became more complex, but also more interesting. This also required more research into the changes that took place within the 5th Air Force.
Grant: What is the scale of the game?
Allyn: Unit scale: single ships and flights (3-10 planes) of aircraft.
Time scale: 10 Command/Support turns, each of one week; 13 Operational turns, over a two day period.
Ground units represent 200-300 personnel.
Grant: What are the different units that the player has control over?
Allyn: The Japanese units include transport ships, destroyers, ground units (presenting the troops and equipment carried on the transports), and fighter aircraft. These are controlled by the Bot. The player controls the Allied units: a mix of aircraft—reconnaissance, heavy bombers, medium bombers, and fighters, and also PT boats.
Grant: What does the concept of Endurance mean for the player? What does this model from the 1943 campaign?
Allyn: Endurance is the amount of time that aircraft can remain airborne. This models the range of aircraft from their bases to the target area. In the initial design, a series of range arcs were used for the individual aircraft types. It was quickly realized this would make for a very complex game. To address playability, aircraft range was changed to consolidate to a single arc (a line on the map) for medium bombers and P-38 fighters, and set Operational turns to 3-hour periods.
Grant: What decisions do they have to make about their assets use and management over the campaign?
Allyn: The game is conducted in two parts: a Command/Support Sequence and an Operational Turn Sequence.
The Command/Support Sequence is a one week period that allows the Allies to receive resource points and reinforcements, then decide how to apply the resource points—rebuilding units, modifying tactics, and determining how to find a convoy at sea.
The Operational Turn Sequence is a two day period where the convoy is moving along convoy routes as the Allies attempt to identify it and then determine the organization of strike forces in an effort to sink it and prevent Japanese forces from reaching Lae, New Guinea.
Grant: As a solitaire wargame how does the Bot behave? What are its priorities and decision points?
Allyn: The Convoy, when dispatched from Rabaul, advances towards its destination (Lae), with random events impacting its progress. The rules introduce the Fog of War that the player must overcome in order to first find the Convoy and then disrupt and attempt to destroy it.
As for decision points, there are several. How are resource points to be spent? When and how to go after a convoy? What assets to use in a given sortie?
Grant: What type of an experience does the Bot create?
Allyn: Designing a solitaire versus a 2-player game presents a whole different set of challenges. Can you design a Bot that will maintain the player’s interest and also challenge them? It should create variety; i.e., when and where will a convoy attempt to make a run; as well as a certain level of anxiety as certain elements are unknown until they can be revealed.
Grant: What are Resource Points and what do they represent?
Allyn: Resource points are the player’s currency and represent personnel, equipment (aircraft), and training.
Grant: What are Resource Points used for?
Allyn: The Resource Points are used by the player to improve tactics, provide replacements for losses, strengthen forces with personnel and equipment, and to launch air attacks. They are the real currency of the game and the player has to use them wisely to do well.
Grant: What is the layout of the board?
Allyn: The board includes the map (the area between New Britain and New Guinea); the turns tracks (for both Command/Support and Operational Turns); the Convoy Display (for air-sea combat); displays for the ships (transports and destroyers) and for tracking victory points and resource points.
Grant: How does combat work?
Allyn: Combat is based on the attack strength of the units for air combat, air-to-surface, and surface combat. The result of a die roll is compared to a unit’s combat strength, and if it’s equal to less than that number (combat strength), a hit is made on the opposing force.
Grant: How are bombers and fighters used in combat?
Allyn: Bombers are used to try and sink the ships of the Convoy. Heavy bombers operate separately from medium bombers, as they drop their bomb loads from altitude, with limited chance of success, while medium bombers engage Japanese ships at low altitude (mast-high approach). Fighters are used to engage the Combat Air Patrol aircraft that the Japanese dispatched to provide air cover for the Convoy.
Grant: How is victory obtained in the game?
Allyn: Victory is based on the number of Japanese troops that fail to reach Lae—by sinking the ships and their cargo of personnel and equipment, they are removed from participation in combat operations on New Guinea.
Grant: What do you feel the game models well?
Allyn: The fog of war; the challenge to figure out how to build and prepare the needed forces, and then how to employ them to accomplish the mission (sink the enemy shipping).
Grant: What has been the experience of your playtesters?
Allyn: Comments led to a major change in design—moving from a single mission to a 10-week campaign and all the elements associated with that larger picture/time frame.
Grant: What are you most pleased about with the design?
Allyn: That it offers two layers to the player experience – organizing and building forces, then utilizing them to execute missions.
Grant: What other designs are you contemplating or already working on?
Allyn: Operation Tidal Wave, the USAAF Ninth Air Force strike on Ploesti, Romania, August 1, 1943.
On August 7, 1539 the last resistance of the Spanish garrison of the Albanian village of Castelnuovo (Novi for the Turks) ceased. After 22 days of open trench and more than a month of combats, skirmishes, assaults and bombardments, the last Spanish defenders fulfilled the destiny they promised themselves when they rejected the offers of surrender that, according to the rules of war, Jareidin Barbarossa, admiral of the Ottoman fleet and general in chief of the operation, had made to them. The city and its fortifications, rather meager and outdated, had been taken by the forces of the Holy League in October 1538, so as not to close the campaign with the bad taste of the naval defeat at Preveza. Fourteen companies of Spanish infantry under the command of D. Francisco Sarmiento de Mendoza y Manuel, some 3,500 soldiers, were garrisoned there for the winter. The following summer brought a tide of 54,000 Turks and a fleet of 200 sails before its walls. After Venice’s defection from the League, there was no possibility of naval relief and the Spanish command authorized capitulation, however Sarmiento and his men decided to respond to Barbarossa’s offer with the phrase “Come whenever you want”, which sealed their fate.
In Castelnuovo 1539, two sides face each other in a desperate battle: the town and its fortifications will eventually yield to Turkish power, but the question is, at what cost? In Castelnuovo we will manage our army with wooden pieces in vertical with sticker, where we will not be able to see the type of unit of the opponent. The board is divided into areas and we will have other types of units such as cannon batteries, walls, bastions, trenches, etc. The confrontations will be made by rolling 6-sided dice and a deck of cards for each side, allowing us to play them to give orders, improve the fighting, dig trenches and special events.
Drop Zone: Southern France is a company-level wargame covering the Allied airborne assault that spearheaded Operation Dragoon, which was the invasion of Southern France or the Second D-Day on August 15, 1944. The history behind this operation is really very interesting as early on the morning of D-Day, the allied First Airborne Task Force (1st ABTF) parachuted a dozen miles behind the Riviera landing beaches to seize key towns and road junctions, to prevent the German occupation forces from counter-attacking the amphibious landing, and to facilitate the advance of Allied forces. The 4:00 AM parachute drop was badly scattered due to an unexpected dense fog bank that blanketed the battlefield. Drop Zone: Southern France covers the first two days of this airborne operation in six game turns, when the American and British paratroopers and glider-men fought surrounded and alone, supported only by French resistance bands. This game is very good and is just a solid wargame.
Crisis: 1914 is a game of international brinkmanship – if you back down too soon, you lose. If you back down too late you lose. But you have hawks and doves in your cabinet and in your government, and out of these conflicting views you must somehow formulate a coherent response to the crisis to win the day and prevent war.
There are 3 interrelated concepts at the heart of Crisis: 1914: Prestige, Tension, and Diplomatic Pressure (DP). Diplomatic Pressure (DP) is how you score Prestige. Tension is how you lose. Every card has a DP value. You apply DP by playing cards. The player with the most Diplomatic Pressure at the end of a turn earns Prestige points. There are other ways of scoring Prestige points too, but this is the most important one. Prestige is how you win. The player with the most Prestige at the end of the game is the winner.
While this game is not necessarily a wargame, but more of a war themed Euro game with a bit of negotiation and tension as you build your tableau of cards, we had a great time with it and really feel that the game is a bit under the radar of folks and should be one of those games that is played at conventions as it seats up to 5 players and is really quite good.
La Der des Ders – The War to End War from Hexasim is a 1-2 player slightly abstracted strategic level look at World War I. The game allows the players to relive the First World War at a strategic level, with each player controlling one of the 2 sides either the Entente, consisting of France, England, Russia, Serbia and other minor nations or the Central Powers including Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and a few minors. La Der des Ders can also be played solo, with a dedicated solitaire bot called “Athena” who utilizes special Cornflower Cards to make decisions about what technologies to invest in, where to undertake offensives and how to utilize limited resources and reinforcements. Each turn, players gain an amount of Resource Points dependent on what nations are in the war, which they can allocate to different areas to guide their overall strategy. Victory is achieved by launching offensives that drain the morale of enemy nations, forcing them out of the conflict through collapse.
In Action Point 1, we looked at the Game Board, discussing the Collapse Tracks, Trade Tracks, Russian Revolution Track and Naval Control Table and other various on-board tables and offensive spaces. In Action Point 2, we covered the Technology Phase and the Technology Tree and Technological Improvement Boards. In Action Point 3, we examined the Event Cards and how they inject the historical narrative into the gameplay and also alter the conditions of the game. In this Action Point, we will walk through an example of an Offensive and take a look at the combat procedure.
Offensives
As we discussed in Action Point 1, shown on the board are the Offensive Arrows that will remind the players about what Offensives they can undertake, meaning what Sectors may be attacked, and what Sectors have already taken their one Offensive against that adjacent Sector per turn. These are identified by red arrows connecting adjacent Sectors and will be covered up by the appropriate Offensive Marker when undertaken. In the below picture, we will take a look at Serbia as an example. You can see that Serbia is surrounded by Central Power countries including Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria (Neutral at the start of the war). They also have a few of their Allied nations adjacent including Romania (Neutral at the start of the war) and Greece (Neutral at the start of the war). From each of the adjacent Sectors there are 2 Offensive Arrows represented meaning that this Sector can both be attacked and can attack the adjacent Sector.
The process of taking Offensives is really pretty simple as players take turns to activate one of their sectors that has not yet been activated this turn. The sector chosen will then be activated and must launch an Offensive against an adjacent enemy sector. There is a cost to the launching of Offensives though as the player will have to pay the appropriate cost by first choosing the size of their Offensive, which in game turns means the number of dice they will pay to roll in the Offensive. The size of the Offensive must be at least 1 and can be up to the current Operational Value of the attacking sector. The player launching the offensive then spends as many Resource Points as the size of the Offensive.
For example, The Entente player decides to attack Austria-Hungary from Russia. If Russia’s Operational Value is currently 2, the size of the Offensive must be between 1 and 2. If the Entente player chooses a size 2 Offensive they will have to spend 2 Resource Points. This would allow Russia to roll 2D6 along with any black dice for their Artillery Technology.
Once both of the players have activated a sector, each player may then continue with Offensives by choosing to activate a new sector until no new sectors can be activated. Each of the sectors can make but a single Offensive per turn. I really like this restriction as it reflects the logistical and material difficulties in planning, funding and executing these large Offensives. A player may always decide to pass rather than activate a sector but once you do pass the Resource Spending phase ends for them. The other player can continue to activate the sectors they want and are able to until they decide to pass on their turn or are no longer able to activate a sector.
Now let’s cover the mechanics of how the Offensive resolves with dice. The player will roll as many white dice as the size of the Offensive they funded. These dice are called Attack Dice and it is important to remember that some technologies allow modifiers to be added to Attack Dice or will grant additional dice to be rolled, usually in the form of Artillery Dice. Each level of Attack Technology implemented in the attacking sector grants a DRM (Die Roll Modifier) of +1 to each Attack Die roll. Each level of Defense Technology implemented in the targeted sector inflicts a Die Roll Modifier of -1 to each Attack Die roll. Each level of Artillery Technology implemented in the attacking sector allows the Attacker to roll 1 black Artillery Die. These dice are not subject to the bonuses/penalties conferred by either Attack or Defense Technologies. Also, keep in mind that the number of Artillery dice cannot exceed the size of the Offensive. This is a mistake that I have made many times in my plays of the game and wish there was a better way to remember this. In the case of Artillery Dice, if the player has developed the Aviation Technology, the attacker may re-roll as many Artillery Dice that failed to inflict a loss as the difference between their Aviation Level and the defender’s Aviation Level.
Each result greater than or equal to the attacking player’s Attack Value inflicts one loss on the defender. The Attack Value of a sector is represented by the die depicted at the end of the Collapse Track. Germany has the best value at a 4 while all other countries, with the exception of Greece who is a 6, have a 5. For each loss suffered in an Offensive, the defender moves the cube on the attacked sector’s Collapse Track by one space to the right. If a cube needs to be moved forward on the Collapse Track, but is already on the right-most space and can’t be moved forward, that country immediately surrenders. The Offensives process is really very simple, and it just fits with the chosen format and scale of the game. Nice and easy but fun with lots of dice rolling.
Counter Attacks
One more thing that I need to share about these Offensives is the concept of a Counter Attack. If at least one of the Attack Dice rolled comes up a natural 1, the attacker will suffer one loss and the cube in their own sector is moved forward one space on the Collapse Track. This is not one loss per 1 result but only 1 such loss with an Offensive. With my luck, I could lose my whole army and have to surrender! Also, remember that Artillery Dice are not affected by the Counter Attack rule.
The process of Offensives in La Der des Ders is very simple and straightforward but works very well in the framework of the game to create many tough choices about how to spend your limited Resource Points and who to attack and from where. As the Central Powers, attacking with Germany each turn makes the most sense as they have the best odds of scoring hits and causing losses to France and Russia but they will have to gauge where they stand and who else might be closer to Collapse and surrender. As the Entente, France and Russia should put a heavy focus on Germany and Austria-Hungary and force the Central Powers player to have to replace losses rather than spending on Technology upgrades and replacements. Continually attacking them will lead to results over the course of the game.
In Action Point 5, we will simply review the Victory Conditions.
Recently, I have been playing a lot of Paths of Glory: The First World War, 1914-1918 from GMT Games on the fabulous Rally the Troops! and these gaming sessions have got me thinking. Thinking about the uselessness of war and conflict and the ultimate negative effects of it all. But not just the loss of life, maiming and disfigurement that comes with war but also the emotional scars. And this got me thinking about despair and hopelessness. Despair! A word that evokes very dark and scary feelings in all of us because it gives the impression of a lack of tomorrow. The dictionary definition of Despair is “the complete loss or absence of hope”. In my opinion, this is a word that can be used to describe many historic battles and wars as they have spiraled into pointless affairs with no end in sight. World War I comes to mind for me and the years of bloody and brutal trench warfare, bombardment and use of deadly chemical weapons such as mustard gas. In this post in the Best 3 Games with… series, I want to share with you games that have despair as a main focus.
*As my Featured Image for this post, I used the painting The Scream by Edvard Munch (1895). He said about the piece that it felt like a “scream through nature,” and the painting features a distorted figure covering its ears, reacting to, rather than making, a sound.
3. Verdun from Dragon Dawn Productions
Verdun is a card game that is focused on the famous siege of Verdun during World War I. As player’s hands dwindle down as they play 2 cards per round but only draw 1, players will also have to play cards that help the other side, timing it strategically to minimize their own casualties. The teams alternate being the Attacker, and each card played leads to more and more deaths. You are fighting over positive victory points from trying to win several positions through over the top attacks that are worth a set amount of VP but that are hidden from view until they are taken so you never know if you are going for the high VP area or the low ones until you blow the whistle to initiate the attack.
A game of Verdun lasts about 16 rounds as players start with 12 cards, which they then play in a series of 12 tricks. When you win the trick, you gain the VP for the position but the winner will lose their lowest valued cards while the loser will lose their highest value cards to the dead pile representing mounting casualties. Low cards have fewer skulls on them representing deaths while higher cards have more. So even in victory you will be accumulating negative VP’s and this is one of the key aspects of the game…managing those deaths! Just like the high command.
In the end, the player with the highest score will win and this number will be very low or can even be negative. In our play of the game, my French defeated Alexander’s Germans by a final score of 3 VP to -14 VP. What a great little trick taking game! The really interesting part about the late game is that your hand has dwindled to being full of your worst cards as you have most likely used the good cards earlier to win tricks or cause losses to your opponent. The last few card plays just seem brutal and you are just hoping to not have to take a lot of skulls. This felt very fruitless and mimics the despair of commanders as they had to issue orders that they knew were not going to result in any positive gains but only the loss of life.
The game is also gorgeous with fantastic original period art used on the cards and amazing graphical layout and design. The images are very gritty and involve the feelings of the battle and create a very thematic portal for the players to experience the difficulties in the battle. Just a very slick little thematic game.
Here is a link to our video review of the game:
2. Paths of Glory: The First World War, 1914-1918 from GMT Games
Paths of Glory is widely thought to be a masterpiece on WWI and after just a few plays of the game, both in person and online on the fabulous Rally the Troops!, I can definitely see why people feel that way. Even though we are novices, the game is just that good and really tells the story of the fruitless efforts of both the Entente and Central Powers as they bashed their heads against each other over control of Europe. The game is long and you generally are going to have to play this one over a long weekend to get it all in and enjoy it properly but it is just such as great tool to understand the complexities of the struggles of trench warfare, supply and the balance of attacking versus taking a breath and regrouping. I really enjoyed the mix of historical events and the choices that I had to wage the war in a way that I felt was appropriate. But, my message to everyone who plays this game is beware of supply. Even in our few plays, supply has been an issue and we have had to make sure we didn’t make a few fatal mistakes that would get us in trouble. I want it to be clear here. I am not good at this game…at all and the nuances of supply and how to play have just eluded me as I continue to make the same errors game after game. But it is really good and I look forward to each new play with enthusiasm and am excited about the chance to get to learn more about this fascinating war that was so very fruitless.
With that being said, generally in every single game the Central Powers will start out by playing their Guns of August card. Guns of August is a crucial, high-stakes opening event for the Central Powers on Turn 1, enabling an immediate, powerful and historical offensive against France and Belgium. It kicks off the continual back and forth of trench warfare and frankly seems to never really generate a good outcome. Each attack is bloody, with both sides being brutalized by having to reduce units and the trenches make attacking more and more difficult as they evolve and grow to Level 2. Paths of Glory in a large part is about resource management and the constant pressure to continue offensive momentum and rebuild troops through the use of Replacement Points and events to bring on additional troops is a major problem for both sides. You can only attack for so long before you will burn yourself out and will have to spend time to recover and get ready for the next turn’s offensives. This process of back and forth will ultimately rarely see fruits on the Western Front and will devolve into stalemate as each side strengthens their defense and the Entente begin to bring in reinforcements from England to shore up the lines and nullify the early German advantage. But the real despair in this game are the decisions about how to play your cards. You can use them for their Ops Points to fuel attacks and movement on the board, use them for the printed event or play them for the Reinforcement Points located at the bottom of the card. This is the real key to the game and managing this process of maneuver, attack, shoring up defenses, buying replacement points and protecting supply lines is where the players lose their minds. You simply cannot continue a full out frontal assault round after round. If you do, you will grind your men to dust and dig their own graves as you will be unable to prepare for the next turn. This is a long game and this process wears on turn after turn and the first person that makes a mistake typically is the one that loses.
Here is a link to our initial impressions video of the game:
1. The Grizzled from CMON Games
The Grizzled is a special game. Not a big game. Not a complex game. And not a game for every one as it is different, focused on the friendship and bonds of a group of French soldiers caught in the trenches of World War I. The game is a cooperative card game set during The Great War, also known as “the war that no one in the U.S. really understands because we only ever learn about World War II”. Ironically, playing The Grizzled is somewhat of a rather peaceful affair, but our plays have found it to be quite challenging, sometimes unwinnable in fact, and that is where the despair comes in. No matter how well you play the cards you are dealt and no matter how hard you work together to overcome challenges, failure is a part of the game and winning is truly at a premium.
The cards represent threats to all of the men’s safety or a hard knock which impacts the player or their compatriots in some way. The goal of the game is to play through all of the Trials cards to find peace (literally a Peace card). A standard game starts with 25 Trial cards on the peace deck and the remaining 34 Trial cards are placed in a separate morale deck (a draw pile). Cards move from the Morale deck to the Trial deck at the end of a mission. The Morale deck sits on a card picturing a monument commemorating the sacrifices made in war. But if you ever see this Monument card, you’ve lost the game.
The goal of each mission is the same to play as many cards as you can before withdrawing from battle. Cards are played in one of two ways; placing a threat in No Man’s Land or placing a hard knock card next to your soldier. Every time you play a card, the group is one step closer to victory, but if there are ever 3 of the same threats showing on the table at any one time, the mission is lost but the game will continue.
Beyond playing a card, there are 2 other actions but they are rarely available. On each player’s character there is a Lucky Charm showing one of the 6 threats in the game. Playing the Lucky Charm as an action allows that player to remove a matching threat from No Man’s Land, making the mission a bit easier to continue. After you use your Lucky charm you flip your character card over and no longer have access to that action. The other action is to make a speech. There are a very limited number of Speech Tokens in the game – the mission leader will receive one after each mission until all the tokens have been distributed. When giving a speech as an action, you have to have the token and you have to choose one of the 6 threats. The OTHER players still active in the mission then remove ONE card from their hand that matches the declared threat. These can be useful but are not guaranteed to have an impact. Once played, a speech token is removed from the game. But, one of my favorite mechanic is when you withdraw and add a support token to your character. The token is, very thematically a cup of coffee. When the round ends, you will pass this coffee to a teammate as support. The teammate that gets the most support at the end of the round can remove two hard-knocks or recover their lucky charm.
While we love the game, and I find it to be supremely interesting, we have never won in over 20 plays. We simply seem to run the same course over and over again and never seem to gain much ground. And I really think that this is the point of the game. And where the despair comes into play. One of the other things that I love about the game is the tag line that appears on the front cover. It reads: Can friendship be stronger than war? This statement gives some pause and causes a lot of discussion in our group particularly with the concepts of the exhaustion of characters (using their Lucky Charm and turning them over), the speeches (removing a threat from the battlefield that you cannot get rid of because no one has the matching cards) and the cups of coffee (support). As if a cup of coffee can overcome anything…but you can always give it a go.
Now there are many games that could be included on this list but the games I have chosen perfectly evoke the level of despair that I was going for in this piece. I have played many other games that convey despair but feel that these 3 best demonstrate the level of hopelessness that I was thinking of. What are your favorite games that evoke despair?
With this My Favorite Wargame Cards Series, I hope to take a look at a specific card from the various wargames that I have played and share how it is used in the game. I am not a strategist and frankly I am not that good at games but I do understand how things should work and be used in games. With that being said, here is the next entry in this series.
#70: Mohawks from Wilderness War: The French & Indian War, 1755-1760 from GMT Games
One of my fondest memories of our wargaming journey was our initial experience with the full campaign game of Wilderness War from GMT Games. We were 2 very inexperienced wargamers and we slogged through a 9-hour marathon play over a few days that ended in a 0-0 tie of all things. That’s right, the game ended in a tie, even though we both had a card in hand, but I was unable to use mine to activate Levis, which was my only potential Victory Point scoring force, and Alexander’s forces were in too tenuous a position or too wounded to risk an open battle for VP’s. You would think that this would have turned us off to the game but on the contrary it made me fall in love with asymmetric wargames and the Card Driven Game mechanic with its use of Action Points and events to wage war on the North American continent. The end score of our game really followed the tension of the game, and the blunders on the side of the British that counter balanced their various successes.
All in all, this game was excellent to play and we both highly recommend it. The two factions play extremely differently which leads to many intricate and reactive strategic decisions. The British have many powerful forces with their Highlanders and cannon while the French have access to better leaders and mobile troops and Indian allies who can run around the frontier raiding and burning settlements for VP’s. Laying siege and assaulting really feels like it should, and avoiding battle until you are ready is something that is integral to maintaining a strong presence on the board. You cannot always get into every possible fight as you will not survive the attrition of these battles. The deck plays really well, and as you don’t have to worry about the opponents events in your hand going off, the management aspect is much simpler yet very engaging as there are always reaction cards you can play or cards that you want to hold onto for that perfect moment.
In previous posts in this series, we have discussed the importance of the players of both sides gaining the trust and services of the indigenous Indian denizens of North America in the fight. The French and British can both use the Indian recruitment cards, including cards such as Iroquois Alliance, Northern Indian Alliance and Western Indian Alliance, to recruit, restore, and move native allies to gain victory points through raids and controlling of territory. The French hold a significant advantage with more access to a greater number of Indian auxiliaries, and will be using these cards to launch early raids, while the British can recruit specialized units like their Mohawk or Cherokee allies.
In this entry, we will take a look at the British card Mohawks. Mohawks is one of those cards that has a pre-requisite qualifying condition to play the card. In this case, the qualifier is that the leader Johnson must be located on the board within 2 spaces of Canajoharie, which was a Mohawk village located in upstate New York. As long as he is within the required 2 spaces, the card can be played to bring out onto the board the Red striped Mohawk Indian units. These must be placed with Johnson and the other added benefit is that any reduced Mohawks on the board can be flipped to their full side. These pro-British units can only be recruited by the British player and their arrival in New York can be a huge boon to the British as the French and their Indian allies will be raiding the villages and settlements up and down the frontier regularly during the game as one of their most dependable sources of Victory Points. These Mohawk allies can spread out around the area and intercept incoming raids before they can occur. Remember that Indian allies in Wilderness War are not powerful combat units and are best used to raid and prevent other tribes from raiding.
I very much love the thematic connection here as in order to attract the Mohawk Indians as your allies you must have someone that they trust in the area and this is Johnson. Sir William Johnson was a pivotal British superintendent of Indian Affairs whose deep integration into Mohawk society secured the crucial Mohawk Nation alliance for the British during the French and Indian War. By living among them, learning their language, and marrying Mohawk women, he maintained the Iroquois Covenant Chain and led Mohawk warriors in key victories. This is one of the great things about these Card Driven Games and their use of the cards to deliver the bits and bobs of history to enlighten our understanding and to expand our knowledge of the period.
As a young man, Johnson moved to the Province of New York to manage an estate purchased by his uncle, Royal Navy officer Peter Warren, which was located in territory of the Mohawk, one of the Six Nations of the Iroquois League. Johnson learned the Mohawk language and Iroquois customs, and was appointed the British agent to the Iroquois. Johnson commanded Iroquois and colonial militia forces against the French and their allies during the war and was later commissioned a major-general for his role in the British victory at the Battle of Lake George in 1755. His capture of Fort Niagara from the French in 1759 brought him additional renown. Throughout his career as a British official among the Iroquois, Johnson combined personal business with official diplomacy, acquiring tens of thousands of acres of Native land and becoming very wealthy.
Neva Game Press (originally called Neva Wargames) is a new publisher who appeared on the scene in the past few years. When I started seeing their posts on Twitter and Facebook, I was immediately impressed with their interesting topic choices for their upcoming games as well as the fact that they are trying to make small footprint wargames that pack a punch. And the art is also very appealing and brings an aesthetically pleasing and attractive look to their games! Recently, they placed their next few games up for pre-order through their Incoming! Pre-Order System including Peking: 55 Days of Fury andI reached out to the owner of the company and design José to see if he could share some information about the design.
Grant: José welcome back to our blog. What is your new upcoming game Peking: 55 Days of Fury about?
José: Thanks, Grant, it’s a pleasure to be here! I’d like to start by mentioning that we’ve recently rebranded from Neva Wargames to Neva Game Press. This change reflects our evolving catalog, as we’re excited to include more thematic games moving forward.
Today, I’m presenting one of my latest designs: Peking: 55 Days of Fury. It’s a 1-2 player game where one side commands the Chinese forces and the other leads the International Legations (an alliance of 8 nations). The game spans 6 turns—representing roughly 9 days each—where players fight to secure the most victory points by the end of the siege.
A full game typically lasts between 2 and 2 1/2 hours, making it perfect for a single session. Please keep in mind that we are still finalizing the artwork and graphic design, so the images shown here are not final. Also, our second pre-order campaign, featuring both Reformation: Fire and Faith and Peking: 55 Days of Fury launched on March 15th. Don’t miss out on the Early Bird discount!
Grant: What does the subtitle “55 Days of Fury” mean and reference?
José: I imagine many of you have seen the classic film 55 Days at Peking—if not, I highly recommend it! It’s a fantastic movie and a core inspiration for this project. With the subtitle “55 Days of Fury”, I wanted to pay tribute to the original title while carving out its own identity. It reflects the sheer intensity of those 55 days of siege, and I wanted the name to capture that raw energy.
Grant: Why was this a subject you wanted to focus on?
José: I’ve always been fascinated by sieges throughout history, from ancient times to the modern era. Because of this, it’s very likely you’ll see more siege-themed titles from me in the future. I already have several compelling projects in mind, such as the 1453 Siege of Constantinople or the Siege of the Alcázar during the Spanish Civil War. There is so much tactical and human drama in a siege that I’m eager to explore the subject and see how to model the differences in each of the sieges and eras represented.
Grant: What are the unique features with the system used for the game?
José: Sieges are often associated with static gameplay—that’s just the nature of the conflict. However, I wanted to design a system that keeps the action fluid and engaging. To achieve this, the entire besieged area is streamlined into four main zones, allowing for a more dynamic experience.
Each side faces unique strategies and challenges, and that asymmetric touch gives the game immense replayability. At its heart, the cards are the engine of the game. It’s important to note how much depth they offer; your success depends entirely on how you plan and optimize your strategy based on card management. I’ve also implemented a unique twist on Fog of War. Instead of these being ‘dead’ or useless cards, you’ll have to make tough tactical decisions about how to use the Fog of War cards you draw at the end of each turn. They could be a resource, not a penalty.
Grant: What must you model regarding the history in the design?
José: There is a wealth of historical detail in this design. From the unit stats to the card events and specialized mechanics, my goal was to represent the siege as authentically as possible without sacrificing a manageable playtime.
For example, the Boxer units have much lower Firepower than other factions, but they boast the highest Manpower values. This reflects their limited weaponry while highlighting their superior numbers—they have the strength to build and repair barricades quickly. In contrast, the Imperial Chinese Army units have better Firepower but generally lower Manpower.
On the other side, the International units are better armed but severely outnumbered. To represent this attrition, when a Chinese unit is defeated, it returns to the unit pool to potentially reappear later. However, injured International units are sent to the Infirmary instead.
The Infirmary is a critical mechanic; it honors the men and women who worked tirelessly to save lives during the siege. The International player must manage this correctly, or risk losing their limited forces for good. Finally, I’ve included Diplomatic Relationships. Based on historical accounts, the International player will face diplomatic tensions between the allied nations. These tensions carry various penalties, forcing the player to balance military action with the need to restore diplomatic stability to avoid major setbacks.
Grant: What is your design goal with the game?
José: My main objective with this design was to prove that sieges don’t have to be limited to solitaire play. I wanted to turn them into a compelling, dynamic head-to-head experience where two players can truly feel the historical pressure and the weight of their consequences.
I want players to experience the unique hardships each side faced during the siege while navigating a system full of fresh ideas and meaningful choices. By providing so many strategic layers and branching paths, I’ve ensured that the game offers deep replayability every time it hits the table.
Grant: What other games did you use as inspiration?
José: While there are other games on the Boxer Rebellion, Peking: 55 Days of Fury offers a completely different perspective. I’ve taken a fresh approach to this fascinating siege, focusing on dynamics and mechanics that haven’t been explored this way before. That’s exactly what makes it so attractive—it fills a gap in the market by providing a unique experience that feels unlike anything else currently available on the subject.
Grant: What sources did you consult about the history?
José: In terms of research, my design was primarily informed by three key works:
• The Boxer Rebellion by Diana Preston: This was my main reference—an incredibly comprehensive account full of the historical nuances that allowed me to build the game’s framework. • Peking 1900: The Boxer Rebellion by Peter Harrington (Osprey Publishing). • The Boxer Rebellion by Lynn E. Bodin.
While Preston’s book provided the narrative and thematic depth, the works by Harrington and Bodin were essential for the technical details. They helped me accurately determine the troop sizes for each nation and provided the visual references needed to correctly represent the uniforms and equipment of every soldier type.
Grant: What is the scale of the game? Force structure of units?
José: I’d classify this as a tactical-scale game. Each International military unit represents approximately 8 to 10 soldiers, highlighting the small, elite nature of the legation guards. In contrast, the Chinese units represent much larger groups of combatants. This difference in scale on the board really emphasizes the ‘few against many’ tension that defined the historical siege.
Grant: What are the differences between the playable factions of the Eight Nation Alliance and the Qing army and Boxers?
José: The asymmetry between both sides is woven into every aspect of the game. As a general overview, while the International forces possess superior weaponry, they are heavily outnumbered by the Chinese. Their logistics also differ significantly: the International player must struggle to manage dwindling supplies within the besieged legations, whereas the Chinese side operates under a completely different set of pressures. Key thematic elements like Diplomacy, the construction of Siege lines, repairing Barricades, the looming arrival of the Relief Column, and the management of the Infirmary all work together to ensure that playing each side requires a totally different mindset and strategy.
Grant: How did you differentiate them in their mechanics?
José: To give you a better idea of how this asymmetry translates to the table, here are some key differences in how each side operates:
• Unit Quality vs. Quantity: While International units are superior in combat, the Chinese player must compensate for this by effectively using artillery pieces, surveillance markers, and sheer numbers. • The Detachment Display: The International player can have a larger detachment of up to 6 units ready for combat, whereas the Chinese side is limited to a smaller detachment of 3, requiring more frequent rotations or reinforcements. • The Infirmary & Attrition: When International units are injured, they are moved to the Infirmary. If it becomes overcrowded, units will die, awarding Victory Points (VP’s) to the Chinese. Managing this by “installing beds” and healing soldiers is a vital survival sub-game. • The Relief Column Mini-Map: The Chinese player manages a specific mini-map tracking the progress of the two Relief Columns marching toward Peking. Their goal is to stall this advance; the further they keep the rescuers at bay, the more VP’s they secure. • Supply Lines: Logistics are a constant struggle for the besieged International side, whereas the Chinese side enjoys much more reliable access to supplies. • Diplomacy & Defenses: The International player starts with fully built defenses but must navigate precarious diplomatic tensions. Conversely, the Chinese side must actively build and maintain their own barricades throughout the game to score VP’s. • Unique Action Phases: Both sides have access to a distinct set of special actions and historical Fog of War cards, ensuring that no two turns feel the same.
Grant: How does the game use cards?
José: Cards are the primary engine of the game, and I designed them to be highly versatile. You don’t just ‘play’ a card; you have to decide how to use it across different phases:
• Initiative & Events: Cards can be used during the Initiative phase or played for their Main Event. • Boosting Mechanics: You can even activate Secondary Events by ‘boosting’ a card with another from your hand, creating powerful combinations. • Action Points: During the Action phase, cards can be spent for Action Points (AP) to perform essential maneuvers. • Deck-Building Elements: As the game progresses, you can incorporate common cards into your hand to improve your deck—often depending on how you manage your Fog of War cards.
I deliberately split the card-driven mechanics into two distinct phases. I wanted to ensure that even if you draw a ‘difficult’ hand, you still have the Action Point phase to fall back on. This gives you the flexibility to spend those cards as AP, ensuring you always have agency over the situation. It’s all about hand optimization and adapting your strategy to the shifting tides of the siege.
Grant: Can you show us a few examples of these different type of cards?
José: In the cards you will find Faction cards, Common cards and Fog of War cards:
Faction Cards Each side has nine Faction cards.
1) Descriptive image of the event. 2) AP value. 3) Support icon – used to execute a Secondary Event during the Event Phase. A card can have a maximum of two different Support icons. Icons can be of the Lion, Heron, or Dragon type.). 4) Initiative value. 5) Event title. The color of the title indicates which side the card belongs to (blue = International, red = Chinese). 6) Description of the Primary Event. 7) Secondary Event Support icon requirement. 8) Description of the Secondary Event. 9) Card number (for identification purposes only; has no effect on the game).
After a Faction Card is played, it is placed in the playing side’s discard pile. The discard pile is reshuffled to form a new draw deck if the existing deck is exhausted when drawing a new hand at the end of the Turn.
Common Cards
Side colors: red and blue. 2. Reminder to remove the card when its events are used.
Fog of War Cards
Fog of War Icon.
Side color (red or blue).
Reminder to remove the card when its events are used.
Grant: What is the layout of the Board? Who is the artist?
José: The central part of the board is where the heart of the action takes place. It features a detailed map of the International Legations and their surroundings, strategically divided into four key sectors. Surrounding this central battlefield, you’ll find various common and individual tracks, along with dedicated display areas for each player to manage their resources and units.
As for the visuals, we are currently in the middle of the creative process. I’m thrilled to be working with a very talented team: David Prieto is handling the Graphic Design, while Germán Pasti and Moreno Paissan are the illustrators bringing the 1900s to life. Although the artwork is still a work-in-progress, we are striving for an immersive and historically evocative look.
Grant: What is the purpose of the various Outer Zones?
José: The board is designed for maximum clarity, with dedicated zones for each player. On the International side, the player manages their Morale and Supply tracks, along with the Detachment, Diplomacy, and Infirmary displays.
The Chinese side also tracks their Morale and Supplies, but their side of the board features the unique Relief Expedition mini-map. This is where the tension builds as the International forces attempt to advance from Taku to Peking, and the Chinese player must do everything in their power to stall them.
Grant: How is diplomacy and diplomatic relations used in the game? What benefits and detriments does it bring?
José: After the Supply check, the International side performs a Diplomatic Status check. The International side rolls one die for each Diplomacy marker (in the Diplomacy area of the International section) on its Parchment side. On a roll of 1, the marker is flipped to its Tension side to indicate tensions between nations.
When Tension occurs, the International side must apply the revealed effect in any Zone where MU of the nation(s) who’s flag is shown are present. If the first Diplomacy box is affected (with flags of Britain and Russia), only Map Zones with both British and Russian MU present are affected.
Tension effects can be cumulative if multiple effects apply to the same Zone. There are several types of effects such as: Tactical dispute (reduces combat strength), Communication Breakdown (it is not possible to use modifiers), Conflicting Priorities (reduces manpower), Water hoarding (it makes it more difficult to extinguish a fire).
Grant: What is the anatomy of the counters?
José: Here is a look at a few of the counters.
Military Units (MU) Each MU marker represents a group of soldiers.
1) Illustration of the nation’s soldier. 2) Flag of the nation. 3) Combat Strength – Ranging from 1 to 3. During combat, the Combat Strength of all MU on each side are added together. 4) Manpower Factor – Ranging from 0 to 3. Used by the International side to Repair Barricades, and by the Chinese side to Lay or Repair Siege Lines.
Grant: How are units activated and chosen?
José: Units are activated through specific actions, and I’ve designed a system that balances tactical planning with the Fog of War. While units are often drawn randomly from a bag, both sides have a dedicated Detachment Area. This acts as a pool of visible, ‘ready-to-deploy’ units that you can plan around. This means you have the flexibility to deploy known forces from your detachment in addition to the tension of drawing new reinforcements directly from the pool.
Grant: What is the general Sequence of Play?
José: The sequence of play is the following:
Initiative • Both sides reveal one card from their hand, simultaneously. • Tie – the player who had the Initiative in the previous turn wins. • Tie on Turn 1 – the Chinese side wins. • The Initiative cannot be given away. • If Fog of War cards were played, execute the Events (Initiative side first). • Played cards are discarded (or removed if a Fog of War Card of the playing side).
Initial Engagement • The Initiative side places their Engagement marker in any Zone. The non-Initiative side then does the same in another Zone. • The Initiative side resolves the Engagement in their chosen Zone, acting as the attacker. • The non-Initiative side then resolves the Engagement in their chosen Zone, acting as the attacker. • Note: If there are no MU present in the Zone, or only MU from one side, the Engagement does not occur.
Events • The Initiative side plays two cards from their hand for their Events. They may play a third Support card to execute Secondary Events. • The non-Initiative side repeats the process.
Maintenance • Both sides, starting with the Initiative side, perform two types of Maintenance checks. • International: Supply Status check (1 die). Roll of 1 to 4 – Lose two Supply levels. Roll of 5 to 6 – Lose one Supply level. Update the Supply Track. Any Supply Track effects are applied: MU are moved to the Infirmary. Diplomacy Status check (1 die per Diplomacy marker on its Parchment side). A result of 1 flips the Diplomacy marker to its Tension side. The revealed effect applies unless the marker is flipped back to its Parchment side via a Diplomacy Special
Action. • Chinese: • Supply Status check (1 die). Roll of 1 to 2 – Lose two Supply levels. Roll of 3 to 4 – Lose one Supply level. Roll of 5 to 6 – No Supply loss. Update the Supply Track. Any Supply Track effects are applied: Morale level reduction. Relief Expedition roll: 1 die: Number of spaces Relief Expedition marker advances on the Relief Map: (1) = 1, (2-4) = 2, (5-6) = 3.
Action • The Initiative side performs Actions with the APs on the remaining card in their hand. • The non-Initiative side repeats the process. • Two types of Actions: Basic: Common to both sides. Cost 1 AP. Can be repeated once per side per Turn. Special: Different for each side. Cost 2 action points. Cannot be repeated.
Command • 6.1. Scoring & Victory Check: (Turns 3 & 6 only): Chinese side gains or loses VPs based on the position of the Relief Expedition marker on the Relief Map. (Turn 6 only): Both sides gain VPs based on their Intact Barricades (International) and Intact Siege Lines (Chinese). o Check for Automatic Victory (one side has 15+ VP advantage). If Turn 6, determine the winner of the game.
Grant: What actions are available to players?
José: Both players have access to a core set of Basic Actions to manage the conflict:
• Combat: Including Engagements, Raids, and Artillery Fire. • Maneuver: Movement and Surveillance to gain the upper hand. • Logistics: Supplying forces and Repairing vital defenses.
However, the true flavor of the game comes from the Specific Special Actions available to each side, reflecting their unique historical roles:
• The International Player focuses on survival and rescue: Expanding the Infirmary, healing wounded units, advancing the Relief Expedition, managing Diplomacy, and increasing political Commitment or Morale. • The Chinese Player focuses on pressure and persistence: Laying Siege Lines, coordinating Artillery Support, increasing Commitment, and rallying their forces to Raise Morale.
This structure ensures that while the basic rules are easy to learn, the strategy for each side is completely distinct.
Grant: How is supply used in the game?
José: Supply management is a cornerstone of the experience, especially for the International side. During the Maintenance Phase, both players must check their supply status. The consequences of failing to maintain logistics are severe and thematic:
• The International Side: For the besieged, a lack of resources is devastating. Failing to meet supply requirements can force healthy units directly into the Infirmary due to exhaustion or starvation. • The Chinese Side: For the attackers, supply issues represent a loss of momentum and logistical strain, resulting in a direct hit to their Morale.
This ensures that players cannot just focus on combat; they must spend precious actions and cards on the Supply action to keep their war machine running.
Grant: How is victory achieved?
José: To win a game of Peking: 55 Days of Fury you must get more victory points (VP’s) than your opponent. Each side has different ways of doing this:
International Side
For each Chinese MU KIA +1 VP.
For each Chinese Artillery Unit Sabotaged: +1 VP.
For each Intact Barricade at the end of the game: +1 VP.
Chinese Side
For each International MU KIA +1 VP.
For each Destroyed Barricade: +1 VP.
For every two (rounded down) Intact Siege Lines at the end of the game: +1 VP.
If the Relief Expedition marker is held in a +1/+2 VP space on the Relief Map at the end of Turn 3, and again at the end of Turn 6 (it can be scored twice). If the marker is on a –1/-2 VP space, the Chinese sides lose that many VP’s at the end of Turn 3 and Turn 6.
There is a case when the game can end automatically in the following cases:
If any side scores 30 VP’s, they are immediately declared the winner.
If at the end of any Turn a side has a 15 VP advantage or more over their opponent, they are declared the winner.
Grant: What type of experience does the game create for players?
José: The experience is defined by a shifting sense of pressure that is unique to each side. Since it is an asymmetrical game, the tension evolves differently for each player as the siege progresses. In the first half of the game, the International player often feels they have the situation under control, but as the turns pass, the weight of the siege begins to take its toll, and maintaining their position becomes increasingly desperate. Conversely, the Chinese player starts by testing the defenses, and their momentum builds as they tighten the noose around the legations.
This ‘cross-fade’ of emotions—from early confidence to late-game survival for one, and from persistence to a final push for the other—ensures that the tension remains high from the very first turn until the final victory point is counted.
Grant: What are you most pleased about with the design?
José: I am truly proud of the system I’ve built for this game. My goal was to prove that a siege doesn’t have to feel static or repetitive, and I believe we’ve achieved a dynamic flow that will surprise players.
If the community enjoys this system (Siege & Storm Series)—which I’m confident they will—I would love to adapt and implement it for other historical sieges in the future. I am always open to feedback and suggestions! Which historic siege would you like to see next? Let me know in the comments.
Grant: What other games are you working on?
José: Beyond Peking, I have several other exciting projects in the pipeline. I am currently putting the finishing touches on Spartacus: Rome Under Threat, a 1-2 player game focusing on the Third Servile War. I am also mid-way through the development of Cid Campeador: Warlord, a 1-4 player game. It spans the dramatic 15-year period from 1085 to 1099—a time defined by El Cid’s exile, the expansion of the Christian kingdoms, and the rising shadow of the Almoravids.
Looking further ahead, I have plenty of ideas in the works, including a new thematic game centered on the Roman Empire and Volume II of our Blind Valor Series, which will utilize the system from Iwo Jima: Hell on Earth. There’s much more to come from Neva Game Press!
José, thank you so much for your time and effort in responding to our request for this interview and for the great detail that you have given us about this game. I am very much interested in Peking: 55 Days of Fury and cannot wait for it to be available to play!
War Story: Occupied France is a co-operative narrative game for one to six players set in World War II occupied France that captures the stakes and tension of espionage and resistance warfare. Your team of covert operatives is all that stands between the infamous German officer Heidenreich and the systematic destruction of French Resistance forces in Morette.
Through three replayable story missions, you must exploit the specialties of your chosen agents to uncover information, enlist allies, and obtain weaponry. Engage occupying forces on tactical encounter maps where careless positioning could cost your agents’ lives. Remember, no plan survives contact with the enemy…and time is running out.
In early 2024, Worthington Publishing announced a unique 2-pack of games on Kickstarter that were marketed as easy to play travel friendly solitaire games. And you know that I love a good solitaire wargame! And when I heard that these games were small, even portable, then I was even more interested. One of the games covered the Pacific Theater of WWII called Pacific War 1942 Solitaire and the other covers the War of 1812 called (you guessed it) War of 1812 Solitaire. These games are designed by Mike and Grant Wylie and each game has 4 pages of rules, a beautiful mounted board and double sided counters. I played both and really very much enjoyed the experience.
A few years ago, after playing all of the games in the Great Statesmen Series, we heard of a new game in the series from a designer not named Mark Herman and I was immediately interested and intrigued as we have had so much fun with Churchill, Pericles and Versailles 1919. Congress of Vienna from GMT Games is a diplomatic card driven wargame based on Churchill and is the 4th game in the Great Statesmen Series. The game is set during the years of 1813-1814 and sees players take on the role of the main characters of the struggle between the Napoleonic Empire and the coalition of Russia, Austria, and Great Britain with their Prussian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Swedish allies. We played the game recently while attending Buckeye Game Fest and then played a full campaign again while attending the World Boardgaming Championships and absolutely were amazed at the changes and innovations to the system introduced by the designer Frank Esparrago.
Anmelden
